Infrasound in mating displays: a peacock's tale

Freeman, Angela R.; Hare, James F.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.01.029

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The frequency response of the speaker used was not, however, ideal. Generating low frequency sounds generally requires the use of extremely large (Freeman & Hare, 2015) and/or bulky speakers (Cornec, Hingrat, Robert, & Rybak, 2015) that have flat frequency responses below 100 Hz. Because male ruffed grouse in our population rarely drum close to roads (five of 64 of the males sampled), large, heavy speakers could not be used in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses of male ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus, L.) to playbacks of drumming displays

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Birds use a variety of sounds in their courtship displays, but the majority of behavioural studies have focused on vocalizations. In contrast, little is known about how non‐vocal sounds, or sonations, are used, even though many avian species produce them. The ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) is a useful species to examine non‐vocal sounds because they lack vocal components in their courtship and rely on a non‐vocal sound to attract mates and defend their territory. Their courtship display, known as “drumming,” is created by the wings, and the number of pulses and speed (pulse rate) varies significantly among males. Anecdotal evidence suggested that males can affect the drumming behaviour of neighbouring males in drumming “duels” in an analogous way to song contests. Here, we test whether males do respond to the playback of drumming sounds of an unfamiliar male. Using a portable speaker system, we played recordings of drumming displays to males that were actively drumming themselves. Throughout each playback, we recorded the drumming behaviour of target males so that we could assess whether drumming activity changes following a playback as well as whether males change the speed of their display. Overall, male grouse were equally likely to approach the speaker or continue drumming following a playback. For those males that continued drumming, their drumming pulse rate was significantly faster following playbacks, but they drummed less often. These results indicate that male ruffed grouse do respond to drumming sounds, but the specific response differs among males. Because the differential response was not related to colour phase or whether a male was drumming in proximity to other males, we suggest that the response of individuals likely varies with other traits, such as hormone levels or behavioural syndrome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural responses of male ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus, L.) to playbacks of drumming displays

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In cassowaries, females produce sounds with a very low fundamental frequency, but it is unknown if they employ the same closed-mouth mechanism as males. Although few data on female preference exist, low frequency calls may evolve by sexual selection if low fundamental frequency calls indicate qualityrelated information (Cornec et al 2015;Freeman and Hare 2015) that is favored through mate choice (Riebel 2009). Interestingly, it appears that no particular mating system is associated with closed-mouth vocalization: among closed-mouth vocalizers are polygynous lek breeders without paternal care (e.g., Greater Sage-Grouse), polygamous species with paternal care (e.g., Rhea), as well as socially monogamous species with high levels of pater-nal care (e.g., Columbiformes; Cassowary; Emu; Handford and Mares 1985).…”

Section: Evolution Of Closed-mouth Vocalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coos, booms, and hoots: The evolution of closed‐mouth vocal behavior in birds

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most birds vocalize with an open beak, but vocalization with a closed beak into an inflating cavity occurs in territorial or courtship displays in disparate species throughout birds. Closed-mouth vocalizations generate resonance conditions that favor low-frequency sounds. By contrast, open-mouth vocalizations cover a wider frequency range. Here we describe closed-mouth vocalizations of birds from functional and morphological perspectives and assess the distribution of closed-mouth vocalizations in birds and related outgroups. Ancestral-state optimizations of body size and vocal behavior indicate that closed-mouth vocalizations are unlikely to be ancestral in birds and have evolved independently at least 16 times within Aves, predominantly in large-bodied lineages. Closed-mouth vocalizations are rare in the small-bodied passerines. In light of these results and body size trends in nonavian dinosaurs, we suggest that the capacity for closed-mouth vocalization was present in at least some extinct nonavian dinosaurs. As in birds, this behavior may have been limited to sexually selected vocal displays, and hence would have co-occurred with open-mouthed vocalizations.

show abstract

“…during "wing-shaking, the male flaps his partially-unfurled wings at approximately 5.4 Hz with his backside facing the female ("peahen"). Next, during "train-rattling", the male vibrates his 68 tail and train at 25-28 Hz (mean 25.6 Hz) while facing toward the female at close range (1 to 1.5 m) ( Fig 1A, S1 Movie), causing the train to shimmer iridescently and emit a prolonged "rattling" 70 sound [18][19][20]. Train-rattling performance by peacocks is obligatory for mating success [18], and eye-tracking experiments have shown that both wing-shaking and train-rattling displays are 72 effective at attracting and holding the peahen's gaze [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Peahens also perform a tail-rattling display at [25][26][27][28][29] Hz in a variety of contexts [20], suggesting that feather vibrations might serve 74 other communicative functions as well. Three studies have found that birds respond behaviorally to playbacks of low frequency sound generated by social displays: peafowl detect the infrasound 76 (< 20 Hz) component of train-rattling and wing-shaking recordings [19]; male houbara bustards (Chlamydotis undulata undulata) respond to low frequency (40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54) Hz) boom vocalizations [22]; 78 and male ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) respond to 45 ± 6 Hz wing beating "drumming" displays [23]. Several other studies have also measured the behavioral response of birds to 80 amplitude-modulated low repetition rate broad-band pulses, which are similar to the mechanical sounds associated with peacock train-rattling; the results of these studies showed that birds from 82 three different families can detect such sounds with repetition rates .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For playback experiments, the preamplifier volume controls of the mixer were adjusted so that the mean playback SPL was 88 ± 1 dB at 3 m as measured by a Type 2 model R8050 sound level 450 meter (accuracy ±1.4 dB, C-weighting, 30-100 dB, slow 1.0 s setting; Reed Instruments, Wilmington, NC USA). For comparison, previously-reported values for peacock train-rattling 452 mechanical sounds corrected for background noise were given as 67 to 77 dB at R = 3 m (unweighted SPL) [19], similar to audible bird wingbeat SPL summarized in S2 Table. Based on 454 the frequency response specifications for our microphone and playback system, we estimated their combined response at 26 Hz to be reduced by 12.5 dB compared to the audible range; the 456 increase in playback SPL relative to the reported values accommodates for this attenuation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biomechanics of the peafowl’s crest reveals frequencies tuned to social displays

Kane

Beveren

Dakin

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary statement: Avian crest feathers have mechanical properties that make them suitable 18 for sensing airflows generated during multimodal social displays. 20. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. It is made available under a The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not . http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/197525 doi: bioRxiv preprint first posted online Oct. 2, 2017; 2 ABSTRACT 22Feathers act as vibrotactile sensors that can detect mechanical stimuli during avian flight and tactile navigation, suggesting that they may also function to detect signals during social 24 displays. We explored this novel sensory modality using the crest plumage of Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus). We first determined whether the airborne stimuli generated by peafowl 26 courtship and social displays couple efficiently via resonance to the vibrational response of feather crests from the heads of peafowl. Peafowl crests were found to have fundamental 28 resonant modes with frequencies that could be driven near-optimally by the shaking frequencies used by peafowl performing train vibrating displays. Crests also were driven to vibrate near 30 resonance when audio recordings of sounds generated by these displays were played back in the acoustic near-field, where such displays are experienced in vivo. When peacock wing-shaking 32 courtship behaviour was simulated in the laboratory, the resulting directional airflow excited measurable vibrations of crest feathers. These results suggest that peafowl crests have properties 34 that make them suitable mechanosensors for airborne stimuli generated during social displays. Such stimuli could complement acoustic perception, thereby enhancing detection and 36 interpretation of social displays. Diverse feather crests are found in many bird species that perform similar displays, suggesting that this proposed sensory modality may be widespread, and 38 possibly derived from flow sensing in other contexts. We suggest behavioral studies to further explore these ideas and their functional implications. 40

show abstract

Infrasound in mating displays: a peacock's tale

Cited by 22 publications

References 40 publications

Behavioural responses of male ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus, L.) to playbacks of drumming displays

Behavioural responses of male ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus, L.) to playbacks of drumming displays

Coos, booms, and hoots: The evolution of closed‐mouth vocal behavior in birds

Biomechanics of the peafowl’s crest reveals frequencies tuned to social displays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About