2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.03.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Female canary mate preferences: differential use of information from two types of male–male interaction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
46
1

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
1
46
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Choosing the optimal timing for displays is a straightforward way to minimize the costs and maximize the probability of mating success (Byrne 2008). Since overlap may obscure the fine temporal components of male calls (Schwartz 1987), females of some species including frogs and birds prefer non-overlapped signals (Amy et al 2008;Martínez-Rivera and Gerhardt 2008). Therefore, successful males typically produce a greater proportion of their total signaling time free from overlap with the signals of other chorus members compared to unsuccessful males (Schwartz et al 2001).…”
Section: Call Timing Appears Dependent On Working Memorymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Choosing the optimal timing for displays is a straightforward way to minimize the costs and maximize the probability of mating success (Byrne 2008). Since overlap may obscure the fine temporal components of male calls (Schwartz 1987), females of some species including frogs and birds prefer non-overlapped signals (Amy et al 2008;Martínez-Rivera and Gerhardt 2008). Therefore, successful males typically produce a greater proportion of their total signaling time free from overlap with the signals of other chorus members compared to unsuccessful males (Schwartz et al 2001).…”
Section: Call Timing Appears Dependent On Working Memorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because female frogs and birds prefer non-overlapped signals (Amy et al 2008;Martínez-Rivera and Gerhardt 2008) and the precedence effect is an inherent responsive property of the vertebrate auditory system (Zurek 1987;Litovsky et al 1999), based on our hypotheses we predicted that male music frogs would (1) avoid producing calls which overlapped the occurrence of either WN or conspecific calls, (2) be more likely to call back to HSA than LSA calls, (3) be more likely to produce calls shortly before a playback of conspecific calls since such behavior would provide a competitive advantage and (4) produce calls in response to LSA calls mainly when the ISIs were long, thereby allowing the males to conserve energy for competing more effectively against the HSA calls.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The behavioral differences between groups did not reach statistical significance due to the lack of response in some subjects although the percentages of active subjects tended to increase from the WN to the NS to the SS group (0.05<p<0.010). The lack of response in some subjects is probably explained by the fact that female canaries have been found to be more discriminative towards their mate’s songs during the last 3 days preceding the laying of the first egg when sexual motivation is high [32]; in this experiment, many females probably did not reach this acme of sexual responsiveness. Therefore these data are in agreement with and tend to confirm the discrimination capacity of these females and also the fact that the number of calls can probably be used as a behavioral index of this discrimination (see [25, 33]).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We can assume that males have the opportunity to hear, and therefore eavesdrop on, male–male singing interactions. Previous studies on domestic canaries have demonstrated that males visually eavesdrop on male–male interactions (Amy & Leboucher 2007) and that females eavesdrop on visual as well as acoustic male–male interactions (Leboucher & Pallot 2004; Amy et al. 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Female canaries are able to gather information from visual as well as acoustic male–male interactions (Leboucher & Pallot 2004; Amy et al.2008) but male canaries are only proven to visually eavesdrop on male–male food interactions (Amy & Leboucher 2007). The following experiment was thus designed to evaluate the ability of male canaries to obtain information from singing interactions and the effects of acoustic eavesdropping on subsequent interactions in male canaries in a controlled laboratory context.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%