Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 61, Issue 8, pp 1169–1176

Shouting the odds: vocalization signals status in a lizard

  • Toby J. Hibbitts
  • Martin J. Whiting
  • Devi M. Stuart-Fox
Original Paper

Abstract

Many species possess multiple sexually dimorphic traits, which incorporate different sensory modalities (e.g., acoustic, olfactory and visual), although their relative roles in sexual selection and in determining reproductive success are still poorly understood for most taxa. We assessed the role of multiple male traits, including one acoustic (dominant call frequency) and one visual (yellow throat patch) trait, in residency advertisement, contest behavior, and breeding success in barking geckos (Ptenopus garrulus garrulus). We show that male barking geckos maintain largely exclusive home ranges, with a trend for larger males to maintain larger home ranges. We also show that larger males have a lower dominant calling frequency. When aggressive behavior was elicited in the field using a recorded call of average frequency, resident males with low frequency calls were more likely to respond aggressively and charge the speaker compared to males with high frequency calls. However, body size and small relative throat patch size, rather than call frequency, were the best predictors of overall aggressiveness. Body size was also the best predictor of whether males bred. We suggest that call frequency in this crepuscular species constitutes an effective long-range signal of body size, used by males for remote rival assessment and to advertise home range boundaries in low-light environments.

Keywords

Lizard Acoustic communication Multiple signals Sensory modalities Home range size Male contests Breeding success 

References

  1. Abell AJ (1998) Male–female spacing patterns in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Amphib Reptil 20:185–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson RA, Vitt LJ (1990) Sexual selection versus alternative causes of sexual dimorphism in teiid lizards. Oecologia 84:145–157Google Scholar
  3. Barki A, Harpaz S, Karplus I (1997) Contradictory asymmetries in body and weapon size, and assessment in fighting male prawns, Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aggress Behav 23:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berglund A, Bisazza A, Pilastro, A (1996) Armaments and ornaments: an evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biol J Linn Soc 58:385–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Candolin U, Voigt H-R (2001) Correlation between male size and territory quality: consequence of male competition or predation susceptibility? Oikos 95:225–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Censky EJ (1995) Mating strategy and reproductive success in the Teiid lizard, Ameiva plei. Behaviour 132:529–557Google Scholar
  7. Civantos E (2000) Home-range ecology, aggressive behaviour, and survival in juvenile lizards, Psammodromus algirus. Can J Zool 78:1681-1685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper WE Jr, Vitt LJ (1993) Female mate choice of large male broad-headed skinks. Anim Behav 45:683–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cox RM, John-Alder HB (2005) Testosterone has opposite effects on male growth in lizards (Sceloporus spp.) with opposite patterns of sexual size dimorphism. J Exp Biol 208:4679–4687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Díaz-Uriarte R (2001) Territorial intrusion risk and anti-predator behavior: a mathematical model. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:1165–1173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elias DO, Hebets EA, Hoy RR (2006) Female preference for complex/novel signals in a spider. Behav Ecol 17:765–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frankenberg E (1982) Vocal behavior of the mediterranean house gecko Hemidactylus turcicus. Copeia 1982:770–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  14. Haacke WD (1969) The call of the barking geckos. Scient Pap Namib Desert Res Stn 46:83–93Google Scholar
  15. Haacke WD (1975) The burrowing geckos of Southern Africa, 1 (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Ann Transvaal Mus 29:198–243Google Scholar
  16. Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hews DK (1993) Food resources affect female distribution and male mating opportunities in the iguanian lizard Uta palmeri. Anim Behav 46:279–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hibbitts TJ (2006) Ecology and sexual selection of the common barking gecko (Ptenopus garrulus). PhD Thesis, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  19. Hibbitts TJ, Pianka ER, Huey RB, Whiting MJ (2005) Ecology of the common barking gecko (Ptenopus garrulus) in southern Africa. J Herpetol 39:509–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huntingford FA, Turner AK, Sneddon L, Neat FC (2000) Prowess and the resolution of animal fights. In: Epsmark Y, Amundsen T, Rosenqvist G (eds) Animal signals: signalling and signal design in animal communication. Tapir, Trondheim, Norway pp 415–427Google Scholar
  21. Johnstone RA (1996) Multiple displays in animal communications: ‘backup signals’ and ‘multiple messages’. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 351:329–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kwiatkowski MA, Sullivan BK (2002) Geographic variation in sexual selection among populations of an Iguanid lizard, Sauromalus obesus (=ater). Evolution 56:2030–2051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. LeBas NR, Marshall NJ (2001) No evidence of female choice for a condition-dependent trait in the Agamid lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus. Behaviour 138:965–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Leiser JK, Gagliardi JL, Itzkowitz M (2004) Does size matter? Assessment and fighting in small and large size-matched pairs of adult male convict cichlids. J Fish Biol 64:1339–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. López P, Munoz A, Martín J (2002) Symmetry, male dominance and female mate preferences in the Iberian rock lizard, Lacerta monticola. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:342–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manley GA (1990) The hearing of geckos. Peripheral hearing mechanisms in reptiles and birds. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 151–164Google Scholar
  27. Marcellini DL (1974) Acoustic behavior of the gekkonid lizard, Hemidactylus frenatus. Herpetologica 30:44–52Google Scholar
  28. Marcellini DL (1978) The acoustic behavior of lizards. In: Greenberg N, MacLean PD (eds) Behavior and neurology of lizards. Rockville, MD, pp 253–267Google Scholar
  29. Martín J, López P (2000) Chemoreception, symmetry and mate choice in lizards. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:1265–1269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maynard Smith J, Harper D (2003) Animal signals. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Maynard Smith J, Parker GA (1976) The logic of asymmetric contests. Anim Behav 24:159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McCauley SJ, Bouchard SS, Farina BJ, Isvaran K, Quader S, Wood DW, St. Mary, CM (2000) Energetic dynamics and anuran breeding phenology: insights from a dynamic game. Behav Ecol 11:429–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A (1993) Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:167–176Google Scholar
  34. Olsson M (1992) Contest success in relation to size and residency in male sand lizards, Lacerta agilis. Anim Behav 44:386–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Olsson M (2001) No female mate choice in Mallee dragon lizards, Ctenophorus fordi. Evol Ecol 15:129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Olsson M, Shine R, Gullberg A, Madsen T, Tegelström H (1996) Sperm selection by females. Nature 383:585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Olsson M, Madsen T, Nordby J (2003) Major histocompatibility complex and mate choice in sand lizards. Proc R Soc Lond B 270(suppl):S254–S256Google Scholar
  38. Ord TJ, Blumstein DT, Evans CS (2002) Ecology and signal evolution in lizards. Biol J Linn Soc 77:127–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Partan S, Yelda S, Price V, Shimizu T (2005) Female pigeons, Columba livia, respond to multisensory audio/video playbacks of male courtship behaviour. Anim Behav 70:957–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parker GA (1974) Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol 47:223–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Polakow DA (1997) Communication and sexual selection in the barking gecko (Ptenopus kochi) M.Sc thesis. University of Cape Town, South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  42. Pough FH, Magnusson WE, Ryan MJ, Taigen TL, Wells KD (1992) Behavioral energetics. In: Feder ME, Berggren WW (eds) Environmental physiology of the anurans. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 395–436Google Scholar
  43. Regalado R (2003) Roles of visual, acoustic, and chemical signals in the social interactions of the tropical house gecko (Hemidactylus mabouia). Carib J Sci 39:307–320Google Scholar
  44. Rose B (1982) Lizard home ranges: methodology and functions. J Herpetol 16:253–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rubolini D, Romano M, Marinelli R, Leoni B, Saino N (2006) Effects of prenatal yolk androgens on armaments and ornaments of the ring-necked pheasant. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:549–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ruby DE (1981) Phenotypic correlates of male reproductive success in the lizard, Sceloporus jarrovi. In: Alexander RD, Tinkle DW (eds) Natural selection and social behavior: recent research and new theory. Chiron Press, New York, pp 96–107Google Scholar
  47. Salvador A, Veiga JP (2001) Male traits and pairing success in the lizard Psammodromus algirus. Herpetologica 57:77–86Google Scholar
  48. Smith GR (1995) Home range size, overlap, and individual growth in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Acta Oecol 16:413–421Google Scholar
  49. Stamps JA (1977) Social behavior and spacing patterns in lizards. In: Gans C, Tinkle DW (eds) Biology of the reptilia, vol 7. Ecology and behavior. Academic, New York, pp 265–334Google Scholar
  50. Stamps JA (1983) Sexual selection, sexual dimorphism, and territoriality. In: Huey RB, Pianka ER, Schoener TW (eds) Lizard ecology: studies of a model organism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 169–204Google Scholar
  51. Stamps JA, Krishnan VV (1998) Territory acquisition in lizards. IV. Obtaining high status and exclusive home ranges. Anim Behav 55:461–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tang Y, Zhuang L, Wang Z (2001) Advertisement call and their relation to reproductive cycles in Gekko gecko (Reptilia, Lacertilia). Copeia 2001:248–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tokarz RR (1985) Body size as a factor determining dominance in stage agonistic encounters between male brown anoles (Anolis sagrei). Anim Behav 33:746–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Trivers RL (1976) Sexual selection and resource-accruing abilities in Anolis garmani. Evolution 30:253–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vitt LJ, Cooper WE (1985) The evolution of sexual dimorphism in the skink Eumeces laticeps: an example of sexual selection. Can J Zool 63:995–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Werner YL, Frankenberg E, Adar O (1978) Further observation on the distinctive repertoire of Ptyodactylus hasselquistii cf. hasselquistii (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). Isr J Zool 27:176–188Google Scholar
  57. Zucker N, Murray L (1996) Determinants of dominance in the tree lizard Urosaurus ornatus: the relative importance of mass, previous experience and coloration. Ethology 102:812–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toby J. Hibbitts
    • 1
  • Martin J. Whiting
    • 1
  • Devi M. Stuart-Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Animal, Plant, and Environmental SciencesUniversity of the WitwatersrandWitsSouth Africa
  2. 2.Texas Cooperative Wildlife Collection, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries SciencesTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA

Personalised recommendations