Skip Navigation



Behavioral Ecology Advance Access published online on February 16, 2005
Behavioral Ecology, doi:10.1093/beheco/ari032
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
16/3/571    most recent
ari032v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Witte, K.
Right arrow Articles by Wilczynski, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Witte, K.
Right arrow Articles by Wilczynski, W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org
Received March 23, 2004
Revised December 17, 2004
Accepted December 23, 2004

Article

How cricket frog females deal with a noisy world: habitat-related differences in auditory tuning

Klaudia Witte 1, Hamilton E. Farris 1, Michael J. Ryan 1, and Walter Wilczynski 2*

1 Section of Integrative Biology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA
2 Department of Psychology, University of Texas, 1 University Station A8000, Austin, TX 78712-0187, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Walter Wilczynski, E-mail: wilczynski{at}psy.utexas.edu


  Abstract

Cricket frogs (Acris crepitans) occupy a variety of acoustically different habitats ranging from pine forest to open grassland. There is geographic variation in their calls and the tuning of their basilar papilla (BP) correlated with habitat. Here, we characterize the spectral content of environmental noise from two habitats, one a pine forest (Stengl) and one a grassland (Gill) habitat. We then used rounded exponential filter functions based on the mean tuning of auditory fibers in Stengl and Gill females to model the BP tuning characteristics of an average female from the two cricket frog populations occupying those habitats to compare their ability to filter out environmental noise. Noise recordings were made at both sites from 1800 to 2400 h on multiple nights throughout a breeding season (March through early August). Noise spectra were similar at both sites. Cross-correlation analyses of the sampled noise indicated that noise spectra were consistent throughout the night and varied little over the season other than during the month of May. The model auditory filter simulating an average Stengl female was significantly better than one simulating an average Gill female at filtering environmental noise at both sites. Previous work had shown that cricket frog calls suffered greater attenuation and degradation in the Stengl site than the Gill site but that the male calls from Stengl frogs suffered less attenuation and less degradation than Gill calls during transmission through both habitats. These new results demonstrate that frogs from the more acoustically challenging Stengl habitat have enhanced both the sender and receiver portions of their communication system, evolving calls that transmit better and auditory filters that better eliminate noise.

Keywords: acoustic communication; amphibian; auditory filters; cricket frog; environmental noise.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc R Soc BHome page
T. J Ord, R. A Peters, B. Clucas, and J. A Stamps
Lizards speed up visual displays in noisy motion habitats
Proc R Soc B, April 22, 2007; 274(1613): 1057 - 1062.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Phil Trans R Soc BHome page
S. M Phelps
Sensory ecology and perceptual allocation: new prospects for neural networks
Phil Trans R Soc B, March 29, 2007; 362(1479): 355 - 367.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.