Twenty four castrated male, 6 intact male, and 11 intact female Hyla cinerea were injected subcutaneously with 25 micrograms arginine-vasotocin (AVT) and induced to call 1 h later in response to the playback of a conspecific mating call. Eighteen castrated males and 8 intact females were implanted 5 mg androgen pellets for 3 weeks prior to the neuropeptide injection. Among castrated males, 6/9 testosterone (T) implanted, 4/9 dihydrotestosterone (DHT) implanted and 2/6 non implanted individuals produced calls after being administered AVT. 5/6 intact non implanted males and 6/8 T intact implanted females also called, and 3 intact non implanted females remained silent after the injection. Evoked calls had a mid-frequency spectral peak at about 1900 Hz which is absent in field-recorded mating calls of this species. Calls of implanted females and castrated non implanted males were shorter than those of castrated implanted and intact non implanted males. Audiograms measured before hormone implants showed dips of enhanced sensitivity at about 0.5, 0.9 and 3.0 kHz in males and females. After AVT injection, thresholds at frequencies within the 0.7-1.5 kHz range were increased in castrated males. Such reduction in sensitivity points to an inhibition of the auditory system during hormone induced vocal activation.
Animals using sound communication employ different strategies to overcome interferences from biotic and abiotic sources. However, interactions among acoustically active species have been studied to a very limited extent. The evoked vocal responses of 20 male frogs Batrachyla taeniata from the temperate austral forest in Chile were tested with conspecific calls and with the calls of two sympatric species: B. antartandica and B. leptopus, broadcast at amplitudes of 73, 79, 85, 91 and 97 dB peak SPL. The subjects responded actively to the conspecific call, but only responded weakly to the call of B. leptopus at the highest intensity. The preferential responses to conspecific calls could contribute to the typical segregation in monospecific choruses observed in areas where these frogs breed in sympatry.
Animals are communicating by sound face interference from biotic and abiotic sources. Contrasting strategies have been reported in different taxa in the presence of prolonged noises, but in particular, interactions among acoustically active species have been studied to a very limited extent. In addition, reactions of a single species to interferences having contrasting structural patterns have not been explored systematically. The vocal responses of 16 male frogs Batrachyla antartandica from the temperate austral forest in Chile were tested with conspecific calls and with the calls of two sympatric species: B. taeniata and B. leptopus, broadcast at amplitudes of 73, 79, 85, 91, and 97 dB peak sound pressure level (SPL). Also, the vocal activity of the subjects during exposure to a 3‐min continuous broadband noise presented at 67 dB root mean square (RMS) SPL was monitored. The subjects gave significantly higher responses to the conspecific relative to the heterospecific calls but increased their vocal output in the presence of continuous noise. The preference of vocal responses for the conspecific relative to heterospecific signals bears a general resemblance to those exhibited by B. taeniata in a previous study and potentially contributes to the typical segregation in conspecific choruses observed in areas where these frogs breed in sympatry. Such lack of vocal responses to heterospecific stimuli contrasts with the increase in vocal activity during exposure to continuous noise lacking a temporal fine structure and points to identify different strategies in confronting interferences of diverse origin.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.