Literature DB >> 9163924

Sexual dimorphism and species differences in the neurophysiology and morphology of the acoustic communication system of two neotropical hylids.

B E McClelland1, W Wilczynski, A S Rand.   

Abstract

We examined auditory tuning and the morphology of the anatomical structures underlying acoustic communication in female Hyla microcephala and H. ebraccata and compared our findings to data from a previous study (Wilczynski et al. 1993) in which we showed species differences in the traits that in males relate to differences in the species-typical calls. Female species differences in the best excitatory frequency (BEF) of the basilar papilla (BP) were similar to the differences seen in males, and females had a significantly lower BEF in H. ebraccata, but not H. microcephala. In both species, females had lower BP thresholds. Snout-vent length, head width, and tympanic membrane diameters were sexually dimorphic in both species and larger in females, whereas laryngeal components were sexually dimorphic and larger in males. Middle and inner ear volumes were not sexually dimorphic. Despite the significant species differences in laryngeal morphology seen in males, female larynges are not significantly different. Furthermore, the interaction of species and sex differences resulted in significantly different degrees of sex dimorphism in the species, particularly for the larynx, which is more sexually dimorphic in H. microcephala, and measures of body size, which are more dimorphic in H. ebraccata.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9163924     DOI: 10.1007/s003590050062

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A            Impact factor:   1.836


  9 in total

Review 1.  Current research in amphibians: studies integrating endocrinology, behavior, and neurobiology.

Authors:  Walter Wilczynski; Kathleen S Lynch; Erin L O'Bryant
Journal:  Horm Behav       Date:  2005-07-14       Impact factor: 3.587

2.  Hearing conspecific vocal signals alters peripheral auditory sensitivity.

Authors:  Megan D Gall; Walter Wilczynski
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-06-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Ultrasonic frogs show extraordinary sex differences in auditory frequency sensitivity.

Authors:  Jun-Xian Shen; Zhi-Min Xu; Zu-Lin Yu; Shuai Wang; De-Zhi Zheng; Shang-Chun Fan
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 4.  Insight into the neuroendocrine basis of signal evolution: a case study in foot-flagging frogs.

Authors:  Lisa A Mangiamele; Matthew J Fuxjager
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2017-10-07       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Sex differences and androgen influences on midbrain auditory thresholds in the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea.

Authors:  Jason A Miranda; Walter Wilczynski
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Auditory sexual difference in the large odorous frog Odorrana graminea.

Authors:  Wei-Rong Liu; Jun-Xian Shen; Yu-Jiao Zhang; Zhi-Min Xu; Zhi Qi; Mao-Qiang Xue
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-02-09       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Auditory sensitivity exhibits sexual dimorphism and seasonal plasticity in music frogs.

Authors:  Ping Yang; Fei Xue; Jianguo Cui; Steven E Brauth; Yezhong Tang; Guangzhan Fang
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2018-10-30       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Auditory perception exhibits sexual dimorphism and left telencephalic dominance in Xenopus laevis.

Authors:  Yanzhu Fan; Xizi Yue; Fei Xue; Jianguo Cui; Steven E Brauth; Yezhong Tang; Guangzhan Fang
Journal:  Biol Open       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 2.422

9.  Preference of spectral features in auditory processing for advertisement calls in the music frogs.

Authors:  Yanzhu Fan; Xizi Yue; Jing Yang; Jiangyan Shen; Di Shen; Yezhong Tang; Guangzhan Fang
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2019-05-10       Impact factor: 3.172

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.