Sound familiar? Acoustic similarity provokes responses to unfamiliar heterospecific alarm calls
Eavesdropping on the alarm calls of other species can provide vertebrates with valuable information about danger, and often responses to heterospecific calls seem to be acquired through learning. However, animals might not require learning to respond to heterospecific alarm calls that are acoustically similar to conspecific calls. Although previous work suggests that learning is necessary for superb fairy-wrens to develop responses to heterospecific alarms, acoustic similarity might also be important. We tested whether fairy-wrens responded to playback of unfamiliar alarm calls and if the strength of responses was affected by acoustic similarity to conspecific calls. We then determined which acoustic properties were likely to be used in alarm call identification. Birds fled to cover after playback of calls that were acoustically similar to their own but did not usually respond to less similar calls. Fairy-wren aerial alarm calls are high-frequency and rapidly frequency modulated; their probability of fleeing to playback of unfamiliar calls increased in response to calls with increasing peak frequencies, and they spent more time in cover following calls with a number of frequency cycles similar to their own. Fairy-wrens also responded strongly to relatively dissimilar calls of 1 allopatric species, possibly because these unfamiliar calls resembled those of a sympatric species to which they had learnt to respond. Our study shows that acoustic similarity can prompt responses to heterospecific alarm calls regardless of experience and together with previous work suggests that both acoustic similarity and learning are important for interspecific responses to alarm calls. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 22 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK|
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:22:y:2011:i:2:p:401-410. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.