Conspecific vocalisations modulate the circadian activity rhythm of marmosets

Abstract

Conspecific vocalisations have an important ecological role for marmosets and likely modulate the circadian timing system. However, the effect of this specific cue on circadian activity rhythm (CAR) has not been evaluated. To analyse the synchroniser effect of conspecific vocalisations on CAR in marmosets, the motor activity of five isolated adult males was continuously recorded in rooms with constant dim light (~2 lx) and attenuated sound. All animals presented positive masking, four presented relative coordination and three presented temporary entrainment associated with the daily pattern of vocalisations from animals kept outdoors, similarly to previous studies that assessed social cues. Furthermore, most animals displayed a shortened circadian period in response to conspecific vocalisation pulses that were reproduced daily for 30 days under total darkness. This is evidence that a non-photic cue with ecological significance can modulate the CAR, reinforcing the role of conspecific vocalisation as an important zeitgeber for marmosets.

A framework for the quantification of soundscape diversity using Hill numbers

“…Second, almost all living organisms have a circadian timing system that allows physiological and behavioural adjustments to the 24h cyclic variation in the surrounding environment (Agostino et al 2020). Indeed, many soniferous species have been shown to repeat their sound emissions at circadian timescales (Jianguo et al 2011; Wang et al 2012; Da Silva et al 2014). Therefore, a 24h period seems like an appropriate sample duration to capture and compare most resident species’ sounds at any given site.…”

Collective Rhythm as an Emergent Property During Human Social Coordination

“…Accordingly, social stimuli have been shown to entrain endogenous rhythms ( Mistlberger and Skene, 2004 ; Favreau et al, 2009 ; Bloch et al, 2013 ) both in species with limited access to the main environmental time cue, i.e., the LD cycle, or those living on natural LD cycles. For example, the circadian synchronization of marmosets placed in temporal isolation (i.e., constant light condition) is favored by the activity profile ( Melo et al, 2013 ) or vocalizations ( da Silva et al, 2014 , but see Erkert et al, 1986 ) of conspecifics, or acoustic and olfactive contact between reproductive pairs ( Bessa et al, 2018 ). In humans, the evidence suggests that social signals are weaker than light cues, but both jointly influence the circadian response (i.e., rhythms with cycles of approximately 24-h) ( Davidson and Menaker, 2003 ; Mistlberger and Skene, 2004 ).…”

External environmental conditions impact nocturnal activity levels in proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) living in Sabah, Malaysia

“…Some abiotic factors which can mask normal activity patterns include weather events (e.g. rain, wind, storms), temperature and moon brightness whereas some biotic factors include food availability, human presence, predator presence, sympatric species presence and intraspecific social behavior (Anderson, 2000;Gander & Moore-Ede, 1983;Mochida & Nishikawa, 2014;Nishikawa & Mochida, 2010;Pruetz, 2018;Silva et al, 2014).…”

“…Some abiotic factors which can mask normal activity patterns include weather events (e.g. rain, wind, storms), temperature and moon brightness whereas some biotic factors include food availability, human presence, predator presence, sympatric species presence and intraspecific social behavior (Anderson, 2000; Gander & Moore‐Ede, 1983; Mochida & Nishikawa, 2014; Nishikawa & Mochida, 2010; Pruetz, 2018; Silva et al, 2014). Understanding the degree to which a species' behavior is flexible can help predict how species will adapt to environments increasingly affected by humans, information that is critical to conservation efforts (Jaman & Huffman, 2013).…”