Eavesdropping and communication networks revealed through playback and an acoustic location system

Our understanding of animal communication is expanding from a dyadic framework of one signaler and one receiver to a broader communication network model, yet empirical studies of communication networks are scarce. To investigate whether territorial males eavesdrop on interactions occurring outside of their territory boundaries and to quantify the neighborhood-level effects of song contests, we simulated diurnal dyadic countersinging exchanges in the undefended spaces between established territories of black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). In each of 10 neighborhoods, we used stereo playback to simulate interactions between 2 unknown rivals. We simulated 2 types of song contests that differed only in the relative timing and patterning of the songs of the contestants; aggressive treatments contained frequency matching and song overlapping, whereas submissive treatments contained neither matching nor overlapping. We used a 16-microphone acoustic location system to record males in the neighborhood surrounding the playback apparatus. Territorial chickadees responded more intensely to the aggressive treatments than the submissive treatments. Neighborhood song output (number of songs produced by all individuals in the recording area) was twice as high after aggressive playback than after submissive playback. Males with territories bordering the playback apparatus had higher song output than males who were more than one territory removed from the playback apparatus. We did not find an influence of male dominance rank on playback responses. Our results reveal that territorial male chickadees eavesdrop on and respond to interactions occurring outside of their territory boundaries. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

[1]  Daniel J. Mennill,et al.  Frequency matching, overlapping and movement behaviour in diurnal countersinging interactions of black-capped chickadees , 2008, Animal Behaviour.

[2]  M. Naguib,et al.  The day after: effects of vocal interactions on territory defence in nightingales. , 2007, The Journal of animal ecology.

[3]  P. K. McGregor,et al.  Animal Communication Networks: Behaviours specific to communication networks , 2005 .

[4]  Marc Naguib,et al.  Animal Communication Networks: Singing interactions in songbirds: implications for social relations and territorial settlement , 2005 .

[5]  Daniel J Mennill,et al.  Female eavesdropping on male song contests in songbirds. , 2002, Science.

[6]  M. Hall,et al.  Overlapping signals in banded wrens: long-term effects of prior experience on males and females. , 2006, Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology.

[7]  D. Mennill,et al.  Chickadee song structure is individually distinctive over long broadcast distances , 2004 .

[8]  William H. Cade,et al.  Agonistic Displays and the Benefits of Fighting in the Field Cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus , 1999, Journal of Insect Behavior.

[9]  John M. Burt,et al.  Animal Communication Networks: Dawn chorus as an interactive communication network , 2005 .

[10]  L. Ratcliffe,et al.  Honest advertisement and song output during the dawn chorus of black-capped chickadees , 1997 .

[11]  Kurt M Fristrup,et al.  Accuracy of an acoustic location system for monitoring the position of duetting songbirds in tropical forest. , 2006, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[12]  M. Naguib,et al.  Effects of territorial intrusions on eavesdropping neighbors: communication networks in nightingales , 2004 .

[13]  K. E. Bonnie,et al.  Expanding the scope for social information use , 2007, Animal Behaviour.

[14]  D. Mennill,et al.  The reproductive choices of eavesdropping female black-capped chickadees, Poecile atricapillus , 2003, Naturwissenschaften.

[15]  Daniel J. Mennill,et al.  Status signaling and communication networks in chickadees: Complex communication with a simple song , 2007 .

[16]  Daniel Otte,et al.  Effects and Functions in the Evolution of Signaling Systems , 1974 .

[17]  Neil D. Burgess,et al.  Bird Census Techniques , 1992 .

[18]  D. Mennill,et al.  Social dominance and fitness in black-capped chickadees , 2007 .

[19]  T. Peake,et al.  Animal Communication Networks: Eavesdropping in communication networks , 2005 .

[20]  S. Vehrencamp Is song–type matching a conventional signal of aggressive intentions? , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  M. Naguib,et al.  Vocal Interactions in Birds: The Use of Song as a Model in Communication , 2000 .

[22]  D. Mennill,et al.  Overlapping and matching in the song contests of black-capped chickadees , 2004, Animal Behaviour.

[23]  Peter K. McGregor,et al.  Accuracy of a passive acoustic location system: empirical studies in terrestrial habitats , 1997 .

[24]  K. Otter Ecology and Behavior of Chickadees and Titmice , 2007 .

[25]  M. Ryan,et al.  The costs and benefits of frog chorusing behavior , 1981, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[26]  M. Naguib,et al.  Effects of dyadic vocal interactions on other conspecific receivers in nightingales , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[27]  D. Mennill,et al.  Do male black-capped chickadees eavesdrop on song contests? A multi-speaker playback experiment , 2004 .

[28]  P. K. McGregor,et al.  Communication networks: social environments for receiving and signalling behaviour , 2000, acta ethologica.

[29]  P. McGregor,et al.  Male great tits eavesdrop on simulated male–to–male vocal interactions , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  Joel Waldfogel,et al.  Introduction , 2010, Inf. Econ. Policy.

[31]  P. McGregor,et al.  THE EFFECT OF THE SEX OF AN AUDIENCE ON MALE-MALE DISPLAYS OF SIAMESE FIGHTING FISH (BETTA SPLENDENS) , 2002 .