Do Male White-Lipped Frogs Use Seismic Signals for Intraspecific Communication?

Lewis, Edwin R.; Narins, Peter M.; Cortopassi, Kathryn A.; Yamada, Walter M.; Poinar, Eva H.; Moore, S. W.; Yu, Xiaolong

doi:10.1093/icb/41.5.1185

Cited by 30 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pounding the ground like this may result in seismic signals and be important in conspecific communication, as has been reported in L. albilabris (Günther, 1859) (LEWIS & NARINS, 1985;NARINS, 1990;LEWIS et al, 2001). Another possibility is that the limb movements represent visual displays, which may be important to communication even in nocturnal species WOGEL et al, 2004;HARTMANN et al, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Reproductive behavior of Leptodactylus mystacinus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with notes on courtship call of other Leptodactylus species

Filho¹,

Giaretta

2008

Iheringia, Sér. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Here we present data on the reproductive behavior of Leptodactylus mystacinus (Burmeister, 1861), including details on courtship behavior. We also describe and compared the courtship calls of L. mystacinus, L. furnarius Sazima & Bokermann, 1978 and Leptodactylus sp. (L. aff. andreae). Field works were conducted in Uberlândia (central Brazil). During courtship, a female approaches a calling male and is led to a previously excavated chamber; a female can approach a silent male that beat his hands and/or feet on the ground as well. The courtship call of L. mystacinus consists of one single arch-shaped note (duration = 0.04 s) repeated 258 times per minute; the courtship calls of L. furnarius (0.06 s, 84 times per minute) and Leptodactylus sp. (0.15 s, 5 times per minute) also are archshaped. The courtship behavior of L. mystacinus is similar to that of other species of the L. fuscus (Schneider, 1799) group; unique to it is that males can beat his hands and/or feet on the ground while courting. The male behavior of conducting the female to a previously excavates chamber and the arch-shaped courtship call may represent other shared derived features of members of the L. fuscus group, including the former Adenomera species.KEYWORDS. Brazilian savanna, foam nests, territoriality, vocalization, parental care. Brasil). Durante a corte, a fêmea aproxima-se de um macho que vocaliza e é levada para uma câmara previamente escavada; uma fêmea pode se aproximar de um macho silente que bate as mãos e/ou pés no solo repetidamente. O canto de corte de L. mystacinus consiste de uma única nota em forma de arco (duração = 0.04 s) repetida 258 vezes por minuto; os cantos de corte de L. furnarius (0.06 s, 84 vezes por minuto) e Leptodactylus sp. (0.15 s, 5 vezes por minuto) também são em forma de arco. O comportamento de corte de L. mystacinus é similar ao de outras espécies do grupo de L. fuscus (Schneider, 1799); sendo exclusivo daquela espécie o fato de que os machos podem bater suas mãos e/ou pés no solo enquanto cortejam. O comportamento do macho de conduzir a fêmea para uma câmara previamente escavada e o canto de corte em forma de arco podem representar outras características derivadas compartilhadas pelos membros do grupo de L. fuscus, incluindo as antigas espécies de Adenomera. RESUMO. Biologia reprodutiva de PALAVRAS-CHAVE.Cerrado, ninhos de espuma, territorialidade, vocalização, cuidado parental.As presently defined, the Leptodactylus (Fitzinger, 1826) species of the L. fuscus (Schneider, 1799) group build foam nests in excavated underground chambers (

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Reproductive behavior of Leptodactylus mystacinus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with notes on courtship call of other Leptodactylus species

Filho¹,

Giaretta

2008

Iheringia, Sér. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Evidence for reproductive isolation can be found through a variety of approaches, including postzygotic hybrid inviability, divergent morphological structure of genitals, or differences in behavioral characters mediating mate recognition. In amphibians, mechanisms of mate recognition and mate choice involve pheromones in salamanders and frogs (Malacarne & Giacoma 1986;Pearl et al 2000;Toyoda et al 2004;Kikuyama et al 2005;Byrne & Keogh 2007;Belanger & Corkum 2009;Poth et al 2012;Starnberger et al 2013;Treer et al 2013), visual signaling such as foot-waving (Hödl & Amézquita 2001;Toledo et al 2007;Boeckle et al 2009), elaborated nuptial displays in newts (Halliday 1977) or inflation of, sometimes colorful, vocal sacs (e.g., Rosenthal et al 2004;Hirschmann & Hödl 2006), water surface waves (Walkowiak & Münz 1985), surface vibrations (Narins 1990;Cardoso & Heyer 1995;Lewis et al 2001;Caldwell et al 2010), acoustic signals (most Sampling rate (R) Number of amplitude measurements taken per second when digitizing a sound wave (e.g., 44.1 kHz sampling rate results in 44,100 samples of amplitude measurement for every second).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

Köhler

Jansen

Rodríguez³

et al. 2017

Zootaxa

457

410

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vocalizations of anuran amphibians have received much attention in studies of behavioral ecology and physiology, but also provide informative characters for identifying and delimiting species. We here review the terminology and variation of frog calls from a perspective of integrative taxonomy, and provide hands-on protocols for recording, analyzing, comparing, interpreting and describing these sounds. Our focus is on advertisement calls, which serve as premating isolation mechanisms and, therefore, convey important taxonomic information. We provide recommendations for terminology of frog vocalizations, with call, note and pulse being the fundamental subunits to be used in descriptions and comparisons. However, due to the complexity and diversity of these signals, an unequivocal application of the terms call and note can be challenging. We therefore provide two coherent concepts that either follow a note-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units of sound as notes, and their entirety as call) or a call-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units as call whenever they are separated by long silent intervals) in terminology. Based on surveys of literature, we show that numerous call traits can be highly variable within and between individuals of one species. Despite idiosyncrasies of species and higher taxa, the duration of calls or notes, pulse rate within notes, and number of pulses per note appear to be more static within individuals and somewhat less affected by temperature. Therefore, these variables might often be preferable as taxonomic characters over call rate or note rate, which are heavily influenced by various factors. Dominant frequency is also comparatively static and only weakly affected by temperature, but depends strongly on body size. As with other taxonomic characters, strong call divergence is typically indicative of species-level differences, whereas call similarities of two populations are no evidence for them being conspecific. Taxonomic conclusions can especially be drawn when the general advertisement call structure of two candidate species is radically different and qualitative call differences are thus observed. On the other hand, quantitative differences in call traits might substantially vary within and among conspecific populations, and require careful evaluation and analysis. We provide guidelines for the taxonomic interpretation of advertisement call differences in sympatric and allopatric situations, and emphasize the need for an integrative use of multiple datasets (bio-acoustics, morphology, genetics), particularly for allopatric scenarios. We show that small-sized frogs often emit calls with frequency components in the ultrasound spectrum, although it is unlikely that these high frequencies are of biological relevance for the majority of them, and we illustrate that detection of upper harmonics depends also on recording distance because higher frequencies are attenuated more strongly. Bioacoustics remains a prime approach in integrative taxonomy of anurans if uncertainty due to possible intraspecific variation and technical artifacts is adequately considered and acknowledged.

show abstract

“…Thus, in response to either an intruding male's vocalizations or the broadcasting of conspecific calls, territorial frogs have been reported to adjust their calling pattern (i) by alternating their call with the perceived acoustic stimulus (13,14) or shifting their call dominant frequency (15) to avoid acoustic interference; (ii) by vocalizing concurrently with the intruder to ''jam'' his advertisement call (16); (iii) by increasing vocalization complexity by adding new call notes to signal an escalating state of aggression (17); or, in response to extremely high playback levels, (iv) by ceasing calling completely (18). In some species, males orient toward the sound source and then physically approach the loudspeaker (phonotactic response; refs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bimodal signal requisite for agonistic behavior in a dart-poison frog,Epipedobatesfemoralis

Narins

Hödl

Grabul

2003

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

230

200

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal acoustic signals play seminal roles in mate attraction and regulation of male spacing, maintenance of pairbonds, localization of hosts by parasites, and feeding behavior. Among vertebrate signals, it is becoming clear that no single stereotyped signal feature reliably elicits species-specific behavior, but rather, that a suite of characters is involved. Within the largely nocturnal clade of anuran amphibians, the dart-poison frog, Epipedobates femoralis, is a diurnal species that physically and vigorously defends its calling territory against conspecific intruders. Here we report that physical attacks by a territorial male are provoked only in response to dynamic bimodal stimuli in which the acoustic playback of vocalizations is coupled with vocal sac pulsations, but not by either unimodal cues presented in isolation or static bimodal stimuli. These results suggest that integration of dynamic bimodal cues is necessary to elicit aggression in this species.animal communication ͉ territorial defense ͉ anuran ͉ amphibian ͉ Dendrobatidae

show abstract

Do Male White-Lipped Frogs Use Seismic Signals for Intraspecific Communication?

Cited by 30 publications

References 20 publications

Reproductive behavior of Leptodactylus mystacinus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with notes on courtship call of other Leptodactylus species

Reproductive behavior of Leptodactylus mystacinus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) with notes on courtship call of other Leptodactylus species

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

Bimodal signal requisite for agonistic behavior in a dart-poison frog,Epipedobatesfemoralis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About