Literature DB >> 23106802

Signal recognition by green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea) and Cope's gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) in naturally fluctuating noise.

Alejandro Vélez1, Mark A Bee.   

Abstract

This study tested three hypotheses about the ability of female frogs to exploit temporal fluctuations in the level of background noise to overcome the problem of recognizing male advertisement calls in noisy breeding choruses. Phonotaxis tests with green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea) and Cope's gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) were used to measure thresholds for recognizing calls in the presence of noise maskers with (a) no level fluctuations, (b) random fluctuations, or level fluctuations characteristic of (c) conspecific choruses and (d) heterospecific choruses. The dip-listening hypothesis predicted lower signal recognition thresholds in the presence of fluctuating maskers compared with nonfluctuating maskers. Support for the dip-listening hypothesis was weak; only Cope's gray treefrogs experienced dip listening and only in the presence of randomly fluctuating maskers. The natural soundscapes advantage hypothesis predicted lower recognition thresholds when level fluctuations resembled those of natural soundscapes compared with artificial fluctuations. This hypothesis was rejected. In noise backgrounds with natural fluctuations, the species-specific advantage hypothesis predicted lower recognition thresholds when fluctuations resembled species-specific patterns of conspecific soundscapes. No evidence was found to support this hypothesis. These results corroborate previous findings showing that Cope's gray treefrogs, but not green treefrogs, experience dip listening under some noise conditions. Together, the results suggest level fluctuations in the soundscape of natural breeding choruses may present few dip-listening opportunities. The findings of this study provide little support for the hypothesis that receivers are adapted to exploit level fluctuations of natural soundscapes in recognizing communication signals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23106802      PMCID: PMC3743964          DOI: 10.1037/a0030185

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Psychol        ISSN: 0021-9940            Impact factor:   2.231


  42 in total

1.  Efficient coding of natural sounds.

Authors:  Michael S Lewicki
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Non-parallel coevolution of sender and receiver in the acoustic communication system of treefrogs.

Authors:  Johannes Schul; Sarah L Bush
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-09-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise.

Authors:  Christian Füllgrabe; Frédéric Berthommier; Christian Lorenzi
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2005-11-08       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  AM representation in green treefrog auditory nerve fibers: neuroethological implications for pattern recognition and sound localization.

Authors:  G M Klump; J H Benedix; H C Gerhardt; P M Narins
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2004-10-05       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Tuning for spectro-temporal modulations as a mechanism for auditory discrimination of natural sounds.

Authors:  Sarah M N Woolley; Thane E Fremouw; Anne Hsu; Frédéric E Theunissen
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-09-04       Impact factor: 24.884

6.  Efficient auditory coding.

Authors:  Evan C Smith; Michael S Lewicki
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2006-02-23       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  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

8.  Within- and across-channel processing in auditory masking: a physiological study in the songbird forebrain.

Authors:  Sonja B Hofer; Georg M Klump
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-07-02       Impact factor: 6.167

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.  Does common spatial origin promote the auditory grouping of temporally separated signal elements in grey treefrogs?

Authors:  Mark A Bee; Kasen K Riemersma
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.844

View more
  9 in total

1.  Assessing stimulus and subject influences on auditory evoked potentials and their relation to peripheral physiology in green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea).

Authors:  Nathan P Buerkle; Katrina M Schrode; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 2.320

2.  Masking release in temporally fluctuating noise depends on comodulation and overall level in Cope's gray treefrog.

Authors:  Mark A Bee; Alejandro Vélez
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Differential effects of sound level and temporal structure of calls on phonotaxis by female gray treefrogs, Hyla versicolor.

Authors:  Kevin W Christie; Johannes Schul; Albert S Feng
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Pulse-number discrimination by Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis) in modulated and unmodulated noise.

Authors:  Alejandro Vélez; Betsy Jo Linehan-Skillings; Yuwen Gu; Yuting Sun; Mark A Bee
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Spatial hearing in Cope's gray treefrog: I. Open and closed loop experiments on sound localization in the presence and absence of noise.

Authors:  Michael S Caldwell; Mark A Bee
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 1.836

6.  Spatial release from masking improves sound pattern discrimination along a biologically relevant pulse-rate continuum in gray treefrogs.

Authors:  Jessica L Ward; Nathan P Buerkle; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 3.208

7.  Dip listening or modulation masking? Call recognition by green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea) in temporally fluctuating noise.

Authors:  Alejandro Vélez; Gerlinde Höbel; Noah M Gordon; Mark A Bee
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2012-10-16       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Treefrogs as animal models for research on auditory scene analysis and the cocktail party problem.

Authors:  Mark A Bee
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2014-01-11       Impact factor: 2.997

9.  Sound-by-sound thalamic stimulation modulates midbrain auditory excitability and relative binaural sensitivity in frogs.

Authors:  Abhilash Ponnath; Hamilton E Farris
Journal:  Front Neural Circuits       Date:  2014-07-25       Impact factor: 3.492

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.