Literature DB >> 20823939

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

Elliot K Love1, Mark A Bee.   

Abstract

One strategy for coping with the constraints on acoustic signal reception posed by ambient noise is to signal louder as noise levels increase. Termed the 'Lombard effect', this reflexive behaviour is widespread among birds and mammals and occurs with a diversity of signal types, leading to the hypothesis that voice amplitude regulation represents a general vertebrate mechanism for coping with environmental noise. Support for this evolutionary hypothesis, however, remains limited due to a lack of studies in taxa other than birds and mammals. Here, we report the results of an experimental test of the hypothesis that male grey treefrogs increase the amplitude of their advertisement calls in response to increasing levels of chorus-shaped noise. We recorded spontaneously produced calls in quiet and in the presence of noise broadcast at sound pressure levels ranging between 40 dB and 70 dB. While increasing noise levels induced predictable changes in call duration and rate, males did not regulate call amplitude. These results do not support the hypothesis that voice amplitude regulation is a generic vertebrate mechanism for coping with noise. We discuss the possibility that intense sexual selection and high levels of competition for mates in choruses place some frogs under strong selection to call consistently as loudly as possible.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20823939      PMCID: PMC2930265          DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.05.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Behav        ISSN: 0003-3472            Impact factor:   2.844


  21 in total

1.  Context-dependent song amplitude control in Bengalese finches.

Authors:  Kohta I Kobayasi; Kazuo Okanoya
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2003-03-03       Impact factor: 1.837

2.  Polyploids with different origins and ancestors form a single sexual polyploid species.

Authors:  Alisha K Holloway; David C Cannatella; H Carl Gerhardt; David M Hillis
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2006-03-08       Impact factor: 3.926

3.  Interference risk and the function of dynamic shifts in calling in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor).

Authors:  Joshua J Schwartz; Robert Brown; Sarah Turner; Kola Dushaj; Marisol Castano
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.231

4.  Amplitude regulation of vocalizations in noise by a songbird, Taeniopygia guttata.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 2.844

5.  Regulation of voice amplitude by the monkey.

Authors:  J M Sinnott; W C Stebbins; D B Moody
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1975-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Indication of a Lombard vocal response in the St. Lawrence River Beluga.

Authors:  P M Scheifele; S Andrew; R A Cooper; M Darre; F E Musiek; L Max
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Ultrasonic signalling by a Bornean frog.

Authors:  Victoria S Arch; T Ulmar Grafe; Peter M Narins
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-02-23       Impact factor: 3.703

8.  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

Review 9.  The cocktail party problem: what is it? How can it be solved? And why should animal behaviorists study it?

Authors:  Mark A Bee; Christophe Micheyl
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.231

10.  Parallel female preferences for call duration in a diploid ancestor of an allotetraploid treefrog.

Authors:  Mark A Bee
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.844

View more
  13 in total

1.  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

2.  Dip listening and the cocktail party problem in grey treefrogs: Signal recognition in temporally fluctuating noise.

Authors:  Alejandro Vélez; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.844

3.  Vocal plasticity in a reptile.

Authors:  Henrik Brumm; Sue Anne Zollinger
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Sound level discrimination by gray treefrogs in the presence and absence of chorus-shaped noise.

Authors:  Mark A Bee; Alejandro Vélez; James D Forester
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Vocal modifications in primates: Effects of noise and behavioral context on vocalization structure.

Authors:  Cara F Hotchkin; Susan E Parks; Daniel J Weiss
Journal:  Proc Meet Acoust       Date:  2013

6.  A meta-analysis on the evolution of the Lombard effect reveals that amplitude adjustments are a widespread vertebrate mechanism.

Authors:  Hansjoerg P Kunc; Kyle Morrison; Rouven Schmidt
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 12.779

7.  Female preferences for spectral call properties in the western genetic lineage of Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis).

Authors:  Katrina M Schrode; Jessica L Ward; Alejandro Vélez; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2012-12-01       Impact factor: 2.980

8.  Sensory attenuation of self-produced feedback: the Lombard effect revisited.

Authors:  Amanda S Therrien; James Lyons; Ramesh Balasubramaniam
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Linking the sender to the receiver: vocal adjustments by bats to maintain signal detection in noise.

Authors:  Jinhong Luo; Holger R Goerlitz; Henrik Brumm; Lutz Wiegrebe
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  The Lombard effect in male ultrasonic frogs: Regulating antiphonal signal frequency and amplitude in noise.

Authors:  Jun-Xian Shen; Zhi-Min Xu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.