Background noise as a selective pressure: stream-breeding anurans call at higher frequencies

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：David Lucas Röhr ; Gustavo Brant Paterno ; Felipe Camurugi…
• 关键词：Acoustic communication ; Advertisement call ; Comparative methods ; Evolution ; Masking interference
• 刊名：Organisms Diversity & Evolution
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：March 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：16
• 期：1
• 页码：269-273
• 全文大小：318 KB
• 参考文献：Bee, M. A., & Bowling, A. C. (2002). Socially mediated pitch alteration by territorial male Bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Journal of Herpetology, 36(1), 140–143.CrossRef
  Blomberg, S. P., Garland, T., & Ives, A. R. (2003). Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution, 57(4), 717–745. doi:10.​1111/​j.​0014-3820.​2003.​tb00285.​x .CrossRef PubMed
  Boeckle, M., Preininger, D., & Hödl, W. (2009). Communication in noisy environments I: acoustic signals of Staurois latopalmatus Boulenger 1887. Herpetologica, 65(2), 154–165. doi:10.​1655/​07-071r1.​1 .CrossRef
  Boonman, A., & Kurniati, H. (2011). Evolution of high-frequency communication in frogs. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 13(2), 197–207.
  Brumm, H. (2013). Animal Communication and Noise (Vol. 2). Heidelberg: Springer.
  Brumm, H., & Slabbekoorn, H. (2005). Acoustic communication in noise. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 35, 151–209.CrossRef
  Chek, A. A., Bogart, J. P., & Lougheed, S. C. (2003). Mating signal partitioning in multi-species assemblages: a null model test using frogs. Ecology Letters, 6(3), 235–247. doi:10.​1046/​j.​1461-0248.​2003.​00420.​x .CrossRef
  Davies, N. B., & Halliday, T. R. (1978). Deep croaks and fighting assessment in toads Bufo bufo. Nature, 274(5672), 683–685. doi:10.​1038/​274683a0 .CrossRef
  Ey, E., & Fischer, J. (2009). The “acoustic adaptation hypothesis” - a review of the evidence from birds, anurans and mammals. Bioacoustics, 19(1-2), 21–48.CrossRef
  Freckleton, R. P., Harvey, P. H., & Pagel, M. (2002). Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. American Naturalist, 160(6), 712–726. doi:10.​1086/​343873 .CrossRef PubMed
  Gerhardt, H. C. (1991). Female mate choise in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Animal Behaviour, 42, 615–635.CrossRef
  Gerhardt, H. C., & Huber, F. (2002). Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  Gerhardt, H. C., & Schwartz, J. J. (2001). Auditory tuning and frequency preferences in anurans. In M. J. Ryan (Ed.), Anuran communication (pp. 73–85). Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  Goicoechea, N., De La Riva, I., & Padial, J. M. (2010). Recovering phylogenetic signal from frog mating calls. Zoologica Scripta, 39(2), 141–154.CrossRef
  Goutte, S., Dubois, A., & Legendre, F. (2013). The importance of ambient sound level to characterise anuran habitat. Plos One, 8(10), e78020. doi:10.​1371/​journal.​pone.​0078020 .CrossRef PubMed PubMedCentral
  Hödl, W., & Amézquita, A. (2001). Visual signaling in anuran amphibians. In M. J. Ryan (Ed.), Anuran Communication (pp. 121–141). Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  Hoskin, C. J., James, S., & Grigg, G. C. (2009). Ecology and taxonomy-driven deviations in the frog call-body size relationship across the diverse Australian frog fauna. Journal of Zoology, 278(1), 36–41. doi:10.​1111/​j.​1469-7998.​2009.​00550.​x .CrossRef
  Kembel, S. W., Cowan, P. D., Helmus, M. R., Cornwell, W. K., Morlon, H., Ackerly, D. D., et al. (2010). Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics, 26(11), 1463–1464. doi:10.​1093/​bioinformatics/​btq166 .CrossRef PubMed
  Lemmon, E. M. (2009). Diversification of conspecific signals in sympatry: geographic overlap drives multidimensional reproductive character displacement in frogs. Evolution, 63(5), 1155–1170.CrossRef PubMed
  Orme, C. D. L., Freckleton, R. P., Thomas, G. H., Petzoldt, T., Fritz, S. A., Isaac, N., et al. (2012). Caper: comparative analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R. R package version 0.5.
  Podos, J. (2001). Correlated evolution of morphologyand vocal signal structure in Darwin’s Fnches. Nature, 409, 185–188.CrossRef PubMed
  Preininger, D., Boeckle, M., & Hödl, W. (2007). Comparison of anuran acoustic communities of two habitat types in the Danum Valley Conservation Area, Sabah, Malaysia. Salamandra, 43(3), 129–138.
  Pyron, R. A., & Wiens, J. J. (2011). A large-scale phylogeny of Amphibia including over 2800 species, and a revised classification of extant frogs, salamanders, and caecilians. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 61(2), 543–583. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ympev.​2011.​06.​012 .CrossRef PubMed
  Ritchie, M. G. (1996). The shape of female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93, 14628–14631.CrossRef
  Ryan, M. J., & Tuttle, M. D. (1983). The ability of the frog-eating bat to discriminate among novel and potentially poisonous frog species using acoustic cues. Animal Behaviour, 31(3), 827–833.CrossRef
  Starnberger, I., Preininger, D., & Hödl, W. (2014). From uni- to multimodality: towards an integrative view on anuran communication. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 200, 777–787.CrossRef
  Vargas-Salinas, F., & Amézquita, A. (2014). Abiotic noise, call frequency and stream
  eeding anuran assemblages. Evolutionary Ecology, 28(2), 341–359. doi:10.​1007/​s10682-013-9675-6 .CrossRef
  Wagner, W. E., Jr. (1989). Fighting, assessment, and frequency alteration in Blanchard’s cricket frog. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 25(6), 429–436.CrossRef
  Wells, K. D. (2010). The ecology and behavior of amphibians. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  Wilkins, M. R., Seddon, N., & Safran, R. J. (2013). Evolutionary divergence in acoustic signals: causes and consequences. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(3), 156–166. doi:10.​1016/​j.​tree.​2012.​10.​002 .CrossRef
  Zimmerman, B. L., & Simberloff, D. (1996). An historical interpretation of habitat use by frogs in a Central Amazonian Forest. Journal of Biogeography, 23, 27–46.CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：David Lucas Röhr (1)
  Gustavo Brant Paterno (1)
  Felipe Camurugi (2)
  Flora Acuña Juncá (3)
  Adrian Antonio Garda (1) (4)
  
  1. Programa de Pós-graduação em Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Lagoa Nova, 59072-970, Natal, RN, Brazil
  2. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Biológicas (Zoologia), Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, Centro de Ciências Exatas e da Natureza, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, 58059-900, PB, Brazil
  3. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, BR 116, Km 03, Campus Universitário, 44031-460, Feira de Santana, BA, Brazil
  4. Departamento de Botânica e Zoologia, Centro de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Campus Universitário, Lagoa Nova, 59078-900, Natal, RN, Brazil
  
• 刊物主题：Biodiversity; Evolutionary Biology; Developmental Biology; Animal Systematics/Taxonomy/Biogeography; Plant Systematics/Taxonomy/Biogeography;
• 出版者：Springer Berlin Heidelberg
• ISSN：1618-1077

文摘

Acoustic signals are an important part in the behaviour of many species and may play a key role in speciation. However, little is known about the importance of natural selection on the evolution of such signals. Acoustics signals are the main communication channel for most anuran species, and background noise from streams is a constant source of masking interference for species reproducing in these environments. Herein, we test if the noise of flowing water habitats has favoured advertisement calls with higher dominant frequencies in frogs. Phylogenetic generalized least square model analysis revealed a significant influence of reproductive environment and body size on dominant frequency, with no significant interaction between habitat and body size. While stream breeders call at higher dominant frequencies, this acoustic parameter is inversely correlated with body size in both environments. We discuss the biological consequences of long-term adaptive shift in this acoustic parameter and possible trade-offs with other evolutionary forces.