Selection on Long-Distance Acoustic Signals

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the evolution of long-distance acoustic signals through the atmosphere (Bass and Clark, Chapter 2, address problems in underwater communication). We are especially interested in signals that are used in mate recognition. In most cases, these signals are produced by males to attract potential mates and repel male competitors, and they are evaluated by females when they make a mating decision. Although there are cases of females attracting males and males choosing females, we will tend to concentrate on the more typical case.

[1]  R. Marsh,et al.  The Enzymatic Basis of High Metabolic Rates in Calling Frogs , 1985, Physiological Zoology.

[2]  K. Wells,et al.  SEASONAL AND NIGHTLY VARIATION IN GLYCOGEN RESERVES OF CALLING GRAY TREEFROGS (HYLA VERSICOLOR) , 1995 .

[3]  E. Morton.  Ecological Sources of Selection on Avian Sounds , 1975, The American Naturalist.

[4]  Michael D Greenfield,et al.  Energetic cost of sexual attractiveness: ultrasonic advertisement in wax moths , 1998, Animal Behaviour.

[5]  Axel Michelsen,et al.  Strategies for Acoustic Communication in Complex Environments , 1983 .

[6]  M. Ryan,et al.  Bat Predation and Sexual Advertisement in a Neotropical Anuran , 1982, The American Naturalist.

[7]  M. Ryan,et al.  Evasive behaviour of a frog in response to bat predation , 1982, Animal Behaviour.

[8]  A. Popper,et al.  Acoustic Communication in Fishes and Frogs , 1999 .

[9]  Michael J. Kearsey,et al.  Genetical Analysis of Quantitative Traits , 2020 .

[10]  E. Morton,et al.  Animal Vocal Communication: A New Approach , 1998 .

[11]  M. Kavanagh.  THE EFFICIENCY OF SOUND PRODUCTION IN TWO CRICKET SPECIES, GRYLLOTALPA AUSTRALIS AND TELEOGRYLLUS COMMODUS (ORTHOPTERA: GRYLLOIDEA) , 1987 .

[12]  H. Markl,et al.  Neuroethology and Behavioral Physiology: Roots and Growing Points , 1983 .

[13]  J. Christy.  Mimicry, Mate Choice, and the Sensory Trap Hypothesis , 1995, The American Naturalist.

[14]  M. Ryan,et al.  History influences signal recognition: neural network models of túngara frogs , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[15]  R. H. Wiley,et al.  Reverberations and Amplitude Fluctuations in the Propagation of Sound in a Forest: Implications for Animal Communication , 1980, The American Naturalist.

[16]  N. Davies,et al.  Nestling cuckoos, Cuculus canorus, exploit hosts with begging calls that mimic a brood , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[17]  Heiner Römer,et al.  The Sensory Ecology of Acoustic Communication in Insects , 1998 .

[18]  R. D. Alexander,et al.  EVOLUTIONARY CHANGE IN CRICKET ACOUSTICAL COMMUNICATION , 1962 .

[19]  J A Endler,et al.  Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. , 1998, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[20]  Gábor Győri.  Animal communication and human language , 1995 .

[21]  A Grafen,et al.  Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[22]  C P Kyriacou,et al.  Interspecific genetic control of courtship song production and reception in Drosophila. , 1986, Science.

[23]  R. A. Fisher,et al.  The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection , 1931 .

[24]  R. D. Howard,et al.  Individual variation in male vocal traits and female mating preferences in Bufo americanus , 1998, Animal Behaviour.

[25]  Michael D Greenfield,et al.  Ultrasonic communication and sexual selection in wax moths: female choice based on energy and asynchrony of male signals , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[26]  M. Ryan,et al.  Call patterns and basilar papilla tuning in cricket frogs. II. Intrapopulation variation and allometry. , 1992, Brain, behavior and evolution.

[27]  C. R. Bevier.  Utilization of energy substrates during calling activity in tropical frogs , 1997, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[28]  R. Dudley,et al.  Frogs in Helium: The Anuran Vocal Sac Is Not a Cavity Resonator , 1993, Physiological Zoology.

[29]  R. B. Lindsay,et al.  The Physics of Music , 1962 .

[30]  P. Marler.  Three models of song learning: evidence from behavior. , 1997, Journal of neurobiology.

[31]  Bernd Fritzsch,et al.  The Evolution of the amphibian auditory system , 1988 .

[32]  M. Ryan,et al.  Behavioral responses of the frog-eating bat,Trachops cirrhosus, to sonic frequencies , 1983, Journal of comparative physiology.

[33]  M. Ryan.  Sexual selection, receiver biases, and the evolution of sex differences. , 1998, Science.

[34]  C. Kyriacou,et al.  Female song preference and theperiod gene inDrosophila , 1993, Behavior genetics.

[35]  Dennis Hasselquist,et al.  Correlation between male song repertoire, extra-pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler , 1996, Nature.

[36]  Nerve cells and insect behavior - studies on crickets. , 1990 .

[37]  B. Zimmerman.  A COMPARISON OF STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF CALLS OF OPEN AND FOREST HABITAT FROG SPECIES IN THE CENTRAL AMAZON , 1983 .

[38]  M. Ryan,et al.  Coevolution of Sender and Receiver: Effect on Local Mate Preferecnce in Cricket Frogs , 1988, Science.

[39]  D. Wallschläger,et al.  Correlation of song frequency and body weight in passerine birds , 1980, Experientia.

[40]  J. Fullard.  The Sensory Coevolution of Moths and Bats , 1998 .

[41]  A. Ewing,et al.  Arthropod Bioacoustics: Neurobiology and Behaviour , 1989 .

[42]  K. Henwood,et al.  A Quantitative Analysis of the Dawn Chorus: Temporal Selection for Communicatory Optimization , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[43]  T. Price,et al.  SPECIATION BY REINFORCEMENT OF PREMATING ISOLATION , 1994, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[44]  M. Ryan,et al.  Bat Predation and the Evolution of Frog Vocalizations in the Neotropics , 1981, Science.

[45]  Foster,et al.  The geography of behaviour: an evolutionary perspective. , 1999, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[46]  T. Tregenza,et al.  Phylogenies and the Comparative Method in Animal Behaviour , 1997 .

[47]  L. S. Frishkopf,et al.  Encoding of Geographic Dialects in the Auditory System of the Cricket Frog , 1973, Science.

[48]  R. R. Capranica,et al.  Evolutionary Origin of Ethological Reproductive Isolation in Cricket Frogs, Acris , 1985 .

[49]  M. Kirkpatrick,et al.  The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek , 1991, Nature.

[50]  H. Proctor.  Courtship in the water mite Neumania papillator: males capitalize on female adaptations for predation , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[51]  M. Ryan,et al.  The transmission of advertisement calls in Central American frogs , 2000 .

[52]  P. Marler,et al.  Sound transmission and its significance for animal vocalization , 1977, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[53]  R. D. Semlitsch,et al.  Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. , 1998, Science.

[54]  M. Ryan.  Energetic efficiency of vocalization by the frog Physalaemus pustulosus , 1985 .

[55]  John A. Endler,et al.  Speciation and Its Consequences , 1989 .

[56]  Jerome Kagan,et al.  Perception of music by infants , 1996, Nature.

[57]  G. Wilkinson,et al.  Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[58]  J. Krebs,et al.  Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach , 1978 .

[59]  T. J. Walker,et al.  Energetics of singing in crickets: Effect of temperature in three trilling species (Orthoptera: Gryllidae) , 1981, Journal of comparative physiology.

[60]  M. Ryan,et al.  SPECIES RECOGNITION AND SEXUAL SELECTION AS A UNITARY PROBLEM IN ANIMAL COMMUNICATION , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[61]  P. Slater,et al.  Bird Song: Biological Themes and Variations , 1995 .

[62]  W. F. Blair,et al.  Evolution in the genus Bufo , 1972 .

[63]  H. Gerhardt,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF VOCALIZATION IN FROGS AND TOADS , 1994 .

[64]  M. Ryan,et al.  Oxygen Consumption during Resting, Calling, and Nest Building in the Frog Physalaemus Pustulosus , 1982, Physiological Zoology.

[65]  P. Handford.  Trill rate dialects in the Rufous-collared Sparrow, Zonotrichia capensis, in northwestern Argentina , 1988 .

[66]  Capranica Rr,et al.  Why auditory neurophysiologists should be more inteeested in animal sound communication. , 1972 .

[67]  K. Wells,et al.  Energetics of vocalization by an anuran amphibian (Hyla versicolor) , 1985, Journal of Comparative Physiology B.

[68]  A. Leviton,et al.  Patterns of Evolution in Galapagos Organisms , 1983 .

[69]  K. Wells,et al.  Calling energetics of a neotropical treefrog, Hyla microcephala , 1989, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[70]  Michael J. Ryan,et al.  Auditory Tuning and Call Frequency Predict Population-Based Mating Preferences in the Cricket Frog, Acris crepitans , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[71]  Christopher G. Murphy.  Chorus tenure of male barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[72]  Chistopher G. Murphy.  Determinants of chorus tenure in barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa) , 1994, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[73]  R. Wiley,et al.  Physical constraints on acoustic communication in the atmosphere: Implications for the evolution of animal vocalizations , 1978, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[74]  M. Littlejohn.  PREMATING ISOLATION IN THE HYLA EWINGI COMPLEX (ANURA: HYLIDAE) , 1965 .

[75]  M. Ryan,et al.  Phylogeny of frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group, with an examination of data incongruence. , 1998, Systematic biology.

[76]  M. Ryan,et al.  Echolocation calls produced by Trachops cirrhosus (Chiroptera: Phyllostomatidae) while hunting for frogs , 1981 .

[77]  R R Hoy,et al.  The evolutionary convergence of hearing in a parasitoid fly and its cricket host. , 1992, Science.

[78]  D. Kroodsma,et al.  Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds , 1997 .

[79]  Jorma Sorjonen,et al.  Factors Affecting the Structure of Song and the Singing Behaviour of Some Northern European Passerine Birds , 1986 .

[80]  M. Ryan,et al.  Ear morphology of the frog‐eating bat (Trachops cirrhosus, family: Phyllostomidae): Apparent specializations for low‐freqency hearing , 1989, Journal of morphology.

[81]  J. Doherty,et al.  Hybrid Tree Frogs: Vocalizations of Males and Selective Phonotaxis of Females , 1983, Science.

[82]  M. Ryan,et al.  THE ROLE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SELECTION IN INTRASPECIFIC DIVERGENCE OF MATE RECOGNITION SIGNALS IN THE CRICKET FROG, ACRIS CREPITANS , 1990, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[83]  R R Hoy,et al.  Hybrid cricket auditory behavior: evidence for genetic coupling in animal communication. , 1977, Science.

[84]  P. Handford,et al.  Vegetational correlates of variation in the song of Zonotrichia capensis , 1981, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[85]  D. Margoliash.  Acoustic parameters underlying the responses of song-specific neurons in the white-crowned sparrow , 1983, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[86]  Daniel J. Howard,et al.  Endless Forms: Species and Speciation , 1998 .

[87]  L. Eberhardt,et al.  OXYGEN CONSUMPTION DURING SINGING BY MALE CAROLINA WRENS (THRYOTHORUS LUDOVICIANUS) , 1994 .

[88]  M. Hauser.  The Evolution of Communication , 1996 .

[89]  George C. Williams,et al.  Adaptation and Natural Selection , 2018 .

[90]  J. C. Hall.  The mating of a fly. , 1994, Science.

[91]  M. Ryan,et al.  Call patterns and basilar papilla tuning in cricket frogs. I. Differences among populations and between sexes. , 1992, Brain, behavior and evolution.

[92]  T. Guilford,et al.  Sensory Bias and the Adaptiveness of Female Choice , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[93]  P. Marler,et al.  Sound transmission and its significance for animal vocalization , 1977, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[94]  H. Gerhardt,et al.  Temperature Coupling in the Vocal Communication System of the Gray Tree Frog, Hyla versicolor , 1978, Science.

[95]  O. V. Helversen,et al.  Separate localization of sound recognizing and sound producing neural mechanisms in a grasshopper , 2004, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[96]  H. Gerhardt,et al.  Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[97]  C. Hartshorne.  The Monotony-Threshold in Singing Birds , 1956 .

[98]  Eliot A. Brenowitz,et al.  The Role of Body Size, Phylogeny, and Ambient Noise in the Evolution of Bird Song , 1985, The American Naturalist.

[99]  C. H. Dodson,et al.  Orchid Flowers: Their Pollination and Evolution , 1966 .

[100]  Christopher G. Murphy.  NIGHTLY TIMING OF CHORUSING BY MALE BARKING TREEFROGS (HYLA GRATIOSA) : THE INFLUENCE OF FEMALE ARRIVAL AND ENERGY , 1999 .

[101]  R. Josephson,et al.  Metabolic Rate and Body Temperature in Singing Katydids , 1977, Physiological Zoology.

[102]  M. Ryan,et al.  Vocal morphology of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group (Leptodactylidae): morphological response to sexual selection for complex calls , 1990 .

[103]  Charles H. Brown,et al.  Habitat acoustics and primate communication , 1986, American journal of primatology.

[104]  S. Pinker.  The Language Instinct , 1994 .

[105]  D. Young,et al.  Song energetics of the bladder cicada, Cystosoma saundersii , 1981 .

[106]  K. Wells,et al.  The effect of social interactions on calling energetics in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) , 1986, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[107]  Torben Dabelsteen,et al.  Habitat‐induced degradation of sound signals: Quantifying the effects of communication sounds and bird location on blur ratio, excess attenuation, and signal‐to‐noise ratio in blackbird song , 1993 .

[108]  G. E. Drewry,et al.  Characteristics of an acoustic community: Puerto Rican frogs of the genus Eleutherodactylus , 1983 .

[109]  K. Prestwich,et al.  Energy and Communication in Three Species of Hylid Frogs: Power Input, Power Output and Efficiency , 1989 .

[110]  W. Cade,et al.  Alternative male strategies: genetic differences in crickets. , 1981, Science.

[111]  M. Ryan.  Energy, calling, and selection , 1988 .

[112]  Fernando Nottebohm,et al.  Continental Patterns of Song Variability in Zonotrichia capensis: Some Possible Ecological Correlates , 1975, The American Naturalist.

[113]  R. Hoy,et al.  The Auditory Behavior of Crickets: Some Views of Genetic Coupling, Song Recognition, and Predator Detection , 1985, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[114]  W. Hödl,et al.  Call differences and calling site segregation in anuran species from central Amazonian floating meadows , 1977, Oecologia.

[115]  C. Boake.  Coevolution of senders and receivers of sexual signals: Genetic coupling and genetic correlations. , 1991, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[116]  J. H. Brackenbury,et al.  Power Capabilities of the Avian Sound-Producing System , 1979 .

[117]  M. Ryan,et al.  Female Responses to Ancestral Advertisement Calls in T�ngara Frogs , 1995, Science.

[118]  D. Vicario,et al.  Song presentation induces gene expression in the songbird forebrain. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[119]  Eliot A. Brenowitz,et al.  Acoustic communication in spring peepers , 1984, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[120]  Ultrasonic signals in the defense and courtship ofEuchaetes egle Drury andE. bolteri Stretch (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae) , 1996, Journal of Insect Behavior.

[121]  M. Littlejohn,et al.  Pulse Repetition Rate as the Basis for Mating Call Discrimination by Two Sympatric Species of Hyla , 1971 .

[122]  N. Davies,et al.  Signals of need in parent–offspring communication and their exploitation by the common cuckoo , 1999, Nature.

[123]  Mario Penna,et al.  Frog call intensities and sound propagation in the South American temperate forest region , 1998, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[124]  Richard R. Fay,et al.  Comparative Hearing: Fish and Amphibians , 1999, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research.

[125]  Ronald R. Hoy,et al.  Comparative Hearing: Insects , 1998, Springer Handbook of Auditory Research.

[126]  W. Hamilton,et al.  Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? , 1982, Science.

[127]  Eliot A. Brenowitz,et al.  Neural correlates of temperature coupling in the vocal communication system of the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) , 1985, Brain Research.

[128]  G. Klump,et al.  Use of non-arbitrary acoustic criteria in mate choice by female gray tree frogs , 1987, Nature.

[129]  M. Ryan,et al.  Evolution of intraspecific variation in the advertisement call of a cricket frog (Acris crepitans, Hylidae) , 1991 .

[130]  M. Ryan,et al.  Light Levels Influence Female Choice in Túngara Frogs: Predation Risk Assessment?@@@Light Levels Influence Female Choice in Tungara Frogs: Predation Risk Assessment? , 1997 .

[131]  W. Conner,et al.  Acoustic courtship communication inSyntomeida epilais Wlk. (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae, Ctenuchinae) , 2005, Journal of Insect Behavior.

[132]  William H. Cade,et al.  Acoustically Orienting Parasitoids: Fly Phonotaxis to Cricket Song , 1975, Science.

[133]  Morris Swadesh,et al.  The origin and diversification of language , 1971 .

[134]  M. Ryan,et al.  Neural networks predict response biases of female túngara frogs , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[135]  M. Ryan,et al.  Directional Patterns of Female Mate Choice and the Role of Sensory Biases , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[136]  M. Ryan,et al.  Energetic constraints and steroid hormone correlates of male calling behaviour in the túngara frog , 1996 .

[137]  J. Endler.  Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[138]  M. Ryan,et al.  Phylogenetic influence on mating call preferences in female túngara frogs,Physalaemus pustulosus , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[139]  H. Proctor.  Sensory exploitation and the evolution of male mating behaviour: a cladistic test using water mites (Acari: Parasitengona) , 1992, Animal Behaviour.

[140]  Michael J. Ryan,et al.  The role of synchronized calling, ambient light, and ambient noise, in anti-bat-predator behavior of a treefrog , 1982, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[141]  R. Zweifel.  Effects of Temperature, Body Size, and Hybridization on Mating Calls of Toads, Bufo a. americanus and Bufo woodhousii fowleri , 1968 .

[142]  Jack W. Bradbury,et al.  Principles of Animal Communication , 1998 .

[143]  W. F. Blair,et al.  Mating Call in the Speciation of Anuran Amphibians , 1958, The American Naturalist.

[144]  B. Sullivan,et al.  Sexual selection in the Gulf Coast toad, Bufo valliceps : female choice based on variable characters , 1995, Animal Behaviour.

[145]  Roy Stripling,et al.  Response Modulation in the Zebra Finch Neostriatum: Relationship to Nuclear Gene Regulation , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[146]  Axel Michelsen,et al.  Biophysics of Sound Localization in Insects , 1998 .

[147]  W. Searcy.  Song repertoire and mate choice in birds , 1992 .

[148]  Anil Kumar,et al.  Acoustic communication in birds , 2003 .

[149]  R. H. Wiley.  Associations of Song Properties with Habitats for Territorial Oscine Birds of Eastern North America , 1991, The American Naturalist.

[150]  Sexual Selection and Sensory Exploitation , 1999 .

[151]  M. Hauser,et al.  The design of animal communication , 1999 .

[152]  E. Morton.  On the Occurrence and Significance of Motivation-Structural Rules in Some Bird and Mammal Sounds , 1977, The American Naturalist.

[153]  M. Zuk,et al.  Exploitation of Sexual Signals by Predators and Parasitoids , 1998, The Quarterly Review of Biology.