| Literature DB >> 22957198 |
Dominique A Potvin, Kirsten M Parris.
Abstract
Recent studies have revealed differences between urban and rural vocalizations of numerous bird species. These differences include frequency shifts, amplitude shifts, altered song speed, and selective meme use. If particular memes sung by urban populations are adapted to the urban soundscape, "urban-typical" calls, memes, or repertoires should be consistently used in multiple urban populations of the same species, regardless of geographic location. We tested whether songs or contact calls of silvereyes (Zosterops lateralis) might be subject to such convergent cultural evolution by comparing syllable repertoires of geographically dispersed urban and rural population pairs throughout southeastern Australia. Despite frequency and tempo differences between urban and rural calls, call repertoires were similar between habitat types. However, certain song syllables were used more frequently by birds from urban than rural populations. Partial redundancy analysis revealed that both geographic location and habitat characteristics were important predictors of syllable repertoire composition. These findings suggest convergent cultural evolution: urban populations modify both song and call syllables from their local repertoire in response to noise.Entities:
Keywords: Acoustic adaptation; Zosterops lateralis; cultural evolution; silvereyes; song dialects; urban noise
Year: 2012 PMID: 22957198 PMCID: PMC3434000 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.320
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Photograph of a silvereye Zosterops lateralis from Canberra, Australia.
Descriptive statistics for song syllable and call variables by habitat type. Data are means ± standard deviation
| RSS | Syllables per song | % Trills in rep | Frequency range (Hz) | Duration (s) | Tempo (peaks/sec) | % Linear calls | % Short calls | % Variable calls | Frequency range (Hz) | Duration (s) | Tempo (peaks/sec) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rural songs/calls | 19.39 ± 9.90 | 14.75 ± 5.71 | 2.12 ± 3.17 | 2140.11 ± 492.39 | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 17.67 ± 3.86 | 19.90 ± 11.25 | 51.60 ± 21.93 | 24.56 ± 18.26 | 2300.70 ± 254.02 | 0.19 ± 0.05 | 13.59 ± 2.74 |
| Urban songs/calls | 20.78 ± 7.28 | 10.74 ± 3.48 | 15.23 ± 22.63 | 2346.15 ± 302.63 | 0.14 ± 0.03 | 16.11 ± 4.76 | 20.17 ± 15.11 | 39.49 ± 26.22 | 34.64 ± 19.47 | 2553.17 ± 232.07 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | 13.71 ± 4.05 |
Figure 2The percentage of all syllable types classified as trills within all urban and rural songs across the study. Error bars represent standard deviation.
Figure 3The percentage of variation between population syllable repertoires explained by each matrix as calculated by partial redundancy analysis. H, habitat matrix; S, spatial matrix; H–S, habitat matrix constrained by the spatial matrix; and S–H, the spatial matrix constrained by the habitat matrix.
The contribution of variables in the habitat matrix (H) and spatial matrix (S) to the variation in the song syllable matrix explained by the RDA and partial RDA. H–S, habitat matrix, when spatial variation was removed (pure environmental variation); S–H, spatial matrix, when environmental variation was removed (pure spatial variation)
| Variable | Matrix | Variation% | Matrix | Variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Urban | H | 9 | H–S | 9 |
| Noise | H | 10 | H–S | 9 |
| Open | H | 7 | H–S | 5 |
| Y (latitude) | S | 17 | S–H | 17 |
| X (longitude) | S | 7 | S–H | 6 |