A Temporal Rule in Vocal Exchange Among Large-Billed Crows<i>Corvus macrorhynchos</i>in Japan

Kondo, Noriko; Watanabe, Shigeru; Izawa, Ei Ichi

doi:10.2326/osj.9.83

Cited by 17 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, naked mole-rats [117], squirrel monkeys [118], female Japanese macaques [119], large-billed crows [120], bottlenose dolphins [121], and some anurans [122, 123] are all capable of simple call-and-response behaviors. Instances of extended, coordinated vocal exchanges include the chorusing behaviors of male anurans and insects in the competitive context of mate attraction [124] and duetting between pair-bonded songbirds (e.g., [125, 126]; for review, see [127]), titi monkeys [128] and gibbons (e.g., [129]; for review, see [130]).…”

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Ghazanfar¹,

Takahashi²

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A full account of human speech evolution must consider its multisensory, rhythmic, and cooperative characteristics. Humans, apes and monkeys recognize the correspondence between vocalizations and the associated facial postures and gain behavioral benefits from them. Some monkey vocalizations even have a speech-like acoustic rhythmicity, yet they lack the concomitant rhythmic facial motion that speech exhibits. We review data showing that facial expressions like lip-smacking may be an ancestral expression that was later linked to vocal output in order to produce rhythmic audiovisual speech. Finally, we argue that human vocal cooperation (turn-taking) may have arisen through a combination of volubility and prosociality, and provide comparative evidence from one species to support this hypothesis.

show abstract

Section: On the Origins Of The Speech Rhythmmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Ghazanfar¹,

Takahashi²

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Vocal exchange, specifically, temporally associated vocal exchange (Schulz et al 2008), is a communication form in which a receiver responds to a sender's sound signal by producing a sound within a brief interval (Miller et al 2004;Sugiura 2007;Kondo and Watanabe 2009;Nakahara and Miyazaki 2011). Several group-living mammals, including non-human primates (Snowdon and Cleveland 1984;Biben et al 1986;Masataka and Biben 1987;Sugiura 1993;Oda 1996;Sugiura 1998;Koda 2004), rodents (Yosida et al 2007), bats (Carter et al 2009), and odontocetes (Janik 2000;Miller et al 2004;Nakahara and Miyazaki 2011), as well as birds (e.g., Kondo et al 2010) and amphibians (e.g., Gerhardt et al 2000), exchange vocal signals. Schulz et al (2008) listed possible functions of vocal exchanges with conspecifics, including mate attraction (e.g., Gerhardt et al 2000), territorial defense (e.g., Mennill and Ratcliffe 2004), social-bonding (e.g., Schulz et al 2008), and group cohesion (e.g., Sugiura 1998;Miller et al 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exchange of “signature” calls in captive belugas (Delphinapterus leucas)

Morisaka

Yoshida

Akune³

et al. 2013

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) produce echolocation clicks, burst pulses, and whistles. The sounds of 3 captive belugas were recorded using 2 hydrophones at the Port of Nagoya Public Aquarium. There were stable individual differences in the pulse patterning of one type of pulsed sounds (PS1 call), suggesting that belugas use these as ''signature'' calls. Eighty-eight percent of PS1 calls initiated PS1 calls from other animals within 1 s. PS1 calls repeated by the same individual occurred primarily when other belugas did not respond within 1 s of the first call. Belugas delayed successive PS1 calls when other belugas responded with a PS1 call within 1 s. There was no clear temporal pattern for whistles. It appears that the time limit for responding to calls is 1 s after the initial call. If other individuals do not respond to the PS1 call of a beluga within 1 s, belugas tend to repeat the call and wait for a response. The results of this study suggest that the belugas exchange their individual signatures by using PS1 calls, in a manner similar to that of signature whistles used by bottlenose dolphins.

show abstract

“…We suggest that the decrease in calling after hearing a reliable alert call may be due to an increased attentiveness towards the stimulus birds in an attempt to gain as much information as possible in a potentially dangerous context. This is plausible in carrion crows, as they may possess temporal rules organizing vocal communication among individuals that resemble that of closely related large-billed crows (Corvus macrorhynchos), which can vary the pace of vocal emission in order to exchange calls with a partner (Kondo et al 2010). However, if crows were gathering information, watching behaviour after exposure to reliable calls might also be expected to increase, in contrast to what happened in the test phases of our experiment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Carrion crows learn to discriminate between calls of reliable and unreliable conspecifics

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Partner choice on the basis of an individual's reliability is expected to stabilize social interactions. In this experiment, we tested whether carrion crows (Corvus corone corone) learn to differentiate between calls of reliable or unreliable individuals. Crows were kept in an aviary that comprised four visually but not acoustically isolated compartments, separated by a central room. In an association phase, a dead crow placed in the central compartment was visible only to one of the four crow groups, whilst alert calls of a conspecific were played back. Therefore, these calls were reliable for that group, but unreliable for the three other groups. The procedure was repeated, using a different reliable caller for each group. In two test sessions, 1 month apart, reliable and unreliable model individuals were played back, but no dead crow was presented. We quantified birds' attention behaviour and the number of vocalisations emitted. In the association phase, crows were more attentive towards the reliable compared with the unreliable stimuli and called more in response to reliable compared to unreliable individuals. In the test and repeat phase, attention behaviour did not differ between reliability conditions, but the pattern of vocal behaviour reversed, with crows calling less frequent when listening to reliable compared with unreliable calls. Vocal responses of crows suggest that they can discriminate between reliable and unreliable callers.

show abstract

A Temporal Rule in Vocal Exchange Among Large-Billed CrowsCorvus macrorhynchosin Japan

Cited by 17 publications

References 46 publications

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

The evolution of speech: vision, rhythm, cooperation

Exchange of “signature” calls in captive belugas (Delphinapterus leucas)

Carrion crows learn to discriminate between calls of reliable and unreliable conspecifics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About