Ambient noise and the design of begging signals

The apparent extravagance of begging displays is usually attributed to selection for features, such as loud calls, that make the signal costly and hence reliable. An alternative explanation, however, is that these design features are needed for effective signal transmission and reception. Here, we test the latter hypothesis by examining how the begging calls of tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) nestlings and the response to these calls by parents are affected by ambient noise. In a field study, we found that call length, amplitude and frequency range all increased with increasing noise levels at nests. In the laboratory, however, only call amplitude increased in response to the playback of noise to nestlings. In field playbacks to parents, similar levels of noise abolished parental preferences for higher call rates, but the preference was restored when call amplitude was increased to the level that nestlings had used in the laboratory study. Our results show that nestling birds, like other acoustic signallers, consistently increase call amplitude in response to ambient noise and this response appears to enhance discrimination by receivers. Thus, selection for signal efficacy may explain some of the seemingly extravagant features of begging displays.

[1]  Edwin R. Lewis,et al.  Acoustically induced call modification in the white-lipped frog, Leptodactylus albilabris , 1988, Animal Behaviour.

[2]  A. Horn,et al.  Begging calls and parental feeding decisions in tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) , 2001, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[3]  G. Bachman,et al.  Energetic Costs of Begging Behaviour , 2002 .

[4]  Dietmar Todt,et al.  Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[5]  A. Horn,et al.  Does begging affect growth in nestling tree swallows, Tachycineta bicolor? , 2003, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[6]  D. Dearborn,et al.  BROWN-HEADED COWBIRD NESTLING VOCALIZATIONS AND RISK OF NEST PREDATION , 1999 .

[7]  Peter L. Tyack,et al.  Whale songs lengthen in response to sonar , 2000, Nature.

[8]  David G. Haskell Begging Behaviour and Nest Predation , 2002 .

[9]  R. Dooling,et al.  Detection and discrimination of natural calls in masking noise by birds: estimating the active space of a signal , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[10]  M. Leonard,et al.  Begging and the risk of predation in nestling birds , 1997 .

[11]  LORI WOLLERMAN,et al.  Acoustic interference limits call detection in a Neotropical frogHyla ebraccata , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[12]  Andrew Horn,et al.  Provisioning rules in tree swallows , 1996, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[13]  A. Grafen Biological signals as handicaps. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[14]  A. Horn,et al.  Dynamics of calling by tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) nestmates , 2001, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[15]  R. Johnstone,et al.  Models of Begging as a Signal of Need , 2002 .

[16]  T. Guilford,et al.  Conspicuousness and Diversity in Animal Signals , 1997 .

[17]  P. Heeb,et al.  Nestling detectability affects parental feeding preferences in a cavity-nesting bird , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[18]  C. Pytte,et al.  Regulation of vocal amplitude by the blue-throated hummingbird, Lampornis clemenciae , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[19]  Andrew G. Horn,et al.  Efficacy and the Design of Begging Signals , 2002 .

[20]  H. Slabbekoorn,et al.  Fluid dynamics: Vortex rings in a constant electric field , 2003, Nature.

[21]  H. Brumm The impact of environmental noise on song amplitude in a territorial bird , 2004 .

[22]  D. Todt,et al.  Acoustic communication in noise: regulation of call characteristics in a New World monkey , 2004, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[23]  Thierry Aubin,et al.  How do king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus apply the mathematical theory of information to communicate in windy conditions? , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.