Stream Noise, Hybridization, and Uncoupled Evolution of Call Traits in Two Lineages of Poison Frogs: Oophaga histrionica and Oophaga lehmanni

Vargas‐Salinas, Fernando; Amézquita, Adolfo

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077545

Cited by 33 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From an evolutionary perspective, it is likely that sexual selection plays a primary role in acoustic divergence between populations and species of anurans and other animals (reviewed by Wilkins et al 2013), but environmental factors might be of considerable influence as well (e.g., Goutte et al 2013;Vargas-Salinas & Amézquita 2013).…”

Section: Intraspecific Variation In Frog Advertisement Callsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

Köhler

Jansen

Rodríguez³

et al. 2017

Zootaxa

481

410

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vocalizations of anuran amphibians have received much attention in studies of behavioral ecology and physiology, but also provide informative characters for identifying and delimiting species. We here review the terminology and variation of frog calls from a perspective of integrative taxonomy, and provide hands-on protocols for recording, analyzing, comparing, interpreting and describing these sounds. Our focus is on advertisement calls, which serve as premating isolation mechanisms and, therefore, convey important taxonomic information. We provide recommendations for terminology of frog vocalizations, with call, note and pulse being the fundamental subunits to be used in descriptions and comparisons. However, due to the complexity and diversity of these signals, an unequivocal application of the terms call and note can be challenging. We therefore provide two coherent concepts that either follow a note-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units of sound as notes, and their entirety as call) or a call-centered approach (defining uninterrupted units as call whenever they are separated by long silent intervals) in terminology. Based on surveys of literature, we show that numerous call traits can be highly variable within and between individuals of one species. Despite idiosyncrasies of species and higher taxa, the duration of calls or notes, pulse rate within notes, and number of pulses per note appear to be more static within individuals and somewhat less affected by temperature. Therefore, these variables might often be preferable as taxonomic characters over call rate or note rate, which are heavily influenced by various factors. Dominant frequency is also comparatively static and only weakly affected by temperature, but depends strongly on body size. As with other taxonomic characters, strong call divergence is typically indicative of species-level differences, whereas call similarities of two populations are no evidence for them being conspecific. Taxonomic conclusions can especially be drawn when the general advertisement call structure of two candidate species is radically different and qualitative call differences are thus observed. On the other hand, quantitative differences in call traits might substantially vary within and among conspecific populations, and require careful evaluation and analysis. We provide guidelines for the taxonomic interpretation of advertisement call differences in sympatric and allopatric situations, and emphasize the need for an integrative use of multiple datasets (bio-acoustics, morphology, genetics), particularly for allopatric scenarios. We show that small-sized frogs often emit calls with frequency components in the ultrasound spectrum, although it is unlikely that these high frequencies are of biological relevance for the majority of them, and we illustrate that detection of upper harmonics depends also on recording distance because higher frequencies are attenuated more strongly. Bioacoustics remains a prime approach in integrative taxonomy of anurans if uncertainty due to possible intraspecific variation and technical artifacts is adequately considered and acknowledged.

show abstract

Section: Intraspecific Variation In Frog Advertisement Callsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

Köhler

Jansen

Rodríguez³

et al. 2017

Zootaxa

481

410

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…). To our knowledge, our study is one of the first (see also Vargas‐Salinas & Amézquita ) to provide evidence of such patterns at the intraspecific level and in relation to noise from streams. The frequency shift we detected apparently contributes to effective communication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…, Boeckle et al . , Vargas‐Salinas & Amézquita ) as well as birds and mammals living in environments acoustically disturbed by humans (Douglas & Conner , De La Torre & Snowdon , Slabbekoorn & Peet , see reviews in Slabbekoorn & Ripmeester , and Slabbekoorn et al . ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microclimate and Stream Noise Predict Geographic Divergence in the Auditory Signal of a Threatened Poison Frog

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the acoustic adaptation hypothesis, abiotic noise generated by streams should promote the evolution of high‐pitched signals in acoustically communicating animals. The putatively selective effect is best demonstrated by studying trait–environment correlations across recently or currently diverging lineages, and when we understand the ecological interactions that underlie the selective pressures. We studied microclimate, frog distribution, abiotic noise, and the frequency of the advertisement call of the Andean poison frog Andinobates bombetes across variable environmental clines at five localities. Our general hypothesis involves three steps: microclimatic clines determine frogs’ distribution, which in turn is associated with different levels of abiotic noise that select for differentially pitched calls. Microclimate changed more abruptly with distance to streams in comparatively dry localities. There, frogs were more aggregated alongside streams and, in turn, experienced higher levels of abiotic noise. As predicted, frogs living alongside streams in dry forests called at higher frequencies, and thus attained comparable signal‐to‐noise ratios, compared with stream‐away frogs. Our data support a role for microclimate in determining frog distribution and thereby the noise conditions that promoted a divergence in a mate‐recognition signal.

show abstract

“…In the spectral domain, different animals living in syntopy often produce signals tuned to non‐overlapping frequency bands (e.g., Ellinger & Hödl, ; García‐Rutledge & Narins, ; Lenske & La, ; Luther, ; Schmidt, Römer, & Riede, ). Also animals living in environments with permanent abiotic noise sources like creeks or seashores, characterized by low‐frequency contents, produce calls having relatively high frequencies, shifted from the background noise range (Douglas & Conner, ; Dubois & Martens, ; Goutte et al., ; Vargas‐Salinas & Amezquita, ), and the spectral shifts produced can even reach the ultrasound range (Feng et al., ). In the temporal domain, interference from syntopic heterospecific signalers causes transitory reductions in the sound output in a number of species (Brumm, ; Brumm & Slabbekoorn, ; Greenfield, , ; Hart, Hall, Ray, Beck, & Zook, ; Latimer & Broughton, ; Littlejohn & Martin, ; Luther, , ; Popp, Ficken, & Reinartz, ; Römer, Bailey, & Dadour, ; Römer et al., ; Schatral & Yeoh, ; Stanley, Walter, Venkatraman, & Wilkinson, ; Wong, Parada, & Narins, ; Zelick & Narins, ), although in some cases, increases in call rates have been reported (Symes, Page, & ter Hofstede, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Frogs from diverse environments use different strategies to confront interference from natural biotic, abiotic, and anthropogenic origin. Some species augment, while others decrease their vocal output when subjected to prolonged exposures to noises of different kinds (Cunnington & Fahrig, ; Kaiser & Hammers, ; Kaiser et al., ; Lengagne, ; Love & Bee, ; Penna & Hamilton‐West, ; Penna, Pottstock, & Velásquez, ; Sun & Narins, ; Vargas‐Salinas & Amezquita, ; Vargas‐Salinas, Cunnington, Amézquita, & Fahrig, ). In particular, in the temperate austral forest, two frogs of the genus Eupsophus, inhabiting the same microenvironment, respond differently to noise exposures of moderate to high levels under similar test conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restricted responsiveness to noise interference in two anurans from the southern temperate forest

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals adopt different strategies to communicate by means of sound in noisy environments such that some species increase, while others decrease their vocal activity in the presence of interference. Anuran amphibians from diverse latitudes exhibit both kinds of responses. Recent studies have shown that males of Batrachyla taeniata and Batrachyla antartandica from the temperate austral forest do not call in response to the presentation of advertisement calls of sympatric congeneric species. In contrast, Batrachyla leptopus responds to these signals in a similar way as to conspecific calls. The responsiveness of B. taeniata to natural abiotic interference has also been tested and found that noises of such sources produce strong increases in vocal activity. To assess the diversity in responsiveness to acoustic intrusion in this group, we exposed males of B. leptopus and B. antartandica to prolonged pre‐recorded natural abiotic noises of wind, creek, rain, and to a band‐pass noise centered at 2,000 Hz, at 67 dB Sound Pressure Level (SPL). The subjects did not increase their vocal activity significantly when exposed to these sounds and to band‐pass noise at increasing intensities (55–79 dB SPL). These results contrast with the increase in vocal activity observed previously in B. taeniata to continuous abiotic noise and point to the existence of diverse strategies to confront acoustic intrusion among related species. The lack of vocal activation observed also contrasts with the responsiveness of B. leptopus to heterospecific signals, but parallels the lack of response to such sounds in B. antartandica. Furthermore, the results obtained contrast with the responsiveness of these species to synthetic prolonged sounds observed in previous studies, suggesting that the modes of responses to acoustic intrusion may depend on previous experience, rather than having a species‐specific nature.

show abstract

Stream Noise, Hybridization, and Uncoupled Evolution of Call Traits in Two Lineages of Poison Frogs: Oophaga histrionica and Oophaga lehmanni

Cited by 33 publications

References 56 publications

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice

Microclimate and Stream Noise Predict Geographic Divergence in the Auditory Signal of a Threatened Poison Frog

Restricted responsiveness to noise interference in two anurans from the southern temperate forest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About