Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 61, Issue 7, pp 1099–1110 | Cite as

Differences in acoustic directionality among vocalizations of the male red-winged blackbird (Agelaius pheoniceus) are related to function in communication

  • Gail L. Patricelli
  • Marc S. Dantzker
  • Jack W. Bradbury
Original Paper

Abstract

Studies of animal acoustic communication have found that the frequency and temporal structure of acoustic signals can be shaped by selection for efficient communication. The directionality of acoustic radiation may also be adapted for communication, but we know relatively little about how directionality varies with signal function, sender morphology, and the environment in which the sound is transmitted. We tested the hypothesis that the directionality of a vocalization is adapted to its function in communication. This hypothesis predicts that vocalizations that are directed to multiple conspecifics (e.g., advertisements and alarms) will be relatively omnidirectional because this will maximize the number of neighbors and mates that receive the signal, and that vocalizations directed to particular individuals will be relatively directional because this will maximize detection of the signal by the targeted receiver and minimize eavesdropping. To test these predictions, we measured the directionality and amplitude of red-winged blackbird (Agelaius pheoniceus) vocalizations in the field by recording vocalizations simultaneously on eight calibrated microphones encircling the bird. We found significant variation in directionality among vocalizations. Supporting our predictions, we found that the most omnidirectional vocalizations were those used to alert conspecifics to danger, and the most directional vocalizations are those used during courtship and solicitation of copulation, when the costs of eavesdropping are likely to be high. These results suggest that the directionality of red-winged blackbird vocalizations is shaped by selection for effective communication. This study is the first to provide statistical support for the hypothesis that directionality is related to the function of a signal in communication.

Keywords

Bird song Directionality Communication Red-winged blackbird 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Anne B. Clark, David Winkler, Paulo Llambias, Bob Johnson, Thorsten Balsby, and Sandra Vehrencamp for advice and logistical support in the field. We thank our reviewers for helpful comments in improving this manuscript. We thank David Winkler for providing weather data from his weather station. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship in Biological Informatics to G.L.P (grant no. DBI-0104291). The methods and experiments described herein comply with current U.S. laws.

References

  1. Arak A (1983) Sexual selection by male–male competition in natterjack toad choruses. Nature 306:261–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur BJ (2004) Sensitivity to spectral interaural intensity difference cues in space-specific neurons of the barn owl. J Comp Physiol, A Sens Neural Behav Physiol V190:91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Au WW, Pawloski JL, Nachtigall PE, Blonz M, Gisner RC (1995) Echolocation signals and transmission beam patterns of the false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens). J Acoust Soc Am 98:51–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beletsky LD, Higgins BJ, Orians GH (1986) Communication by changing signals: call switching in red-winged blackbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  6. Breitwisch R, Whitesides GH (1987) Directionality of singing and non-singing behaviour of mated and unmated northern mockingbirds, Mimus polyglottos. Anim Behav 35:311–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenowitz EA (1982) The active space of red-winged blackbird song. J Comp Physiol 147:511–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brumm H (2002) Sound radiation patterns in Nightingale (Luscinia megarhynchos) songs. J Ornithol 143:468–471Google Scholar
  9. Brumm H, Todt D (2003) Facing the rival: directional singing behaviour in nightingales. Behaviour 140:43–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burton N, Yasukawa K (2001) The “predator early warning system” of red-winged blackbirds. J Field Ornithol 72:106–112Google Scholar
  11. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology Bioacoustics Research Program (2002) Raven. Version 1, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  12. Dabelsteen T (2005) Public, private or anonymous? Facilitating and countering eavesdropping. In: McGregor PK (ed) Animal communication networks. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 38–62Google Scholar
  13. Dantzker MS, Deane GB, Bradbury JW (1999) Directional acoustic radiation in the strut display of male sage grouse Centrocercus urophasianus. J Exp Biol 202:2893–2909PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Flanagan JL (1972) Speech analysis: synthesis and perception. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Forrest TG (1991) Power output and efficiency of sound output by crickets. Behav Ecol 2:327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frommolt K-H, Gebler A (2004) Directionality of dog vocalizations. J Acoust Soc Am 116:561–565PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerhardt HC (1975) Sound pressure levels and radiation patterns of the vocalizations of some North American frogs and toads. J Comp Physiol 102:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gerhardt HC (1998) Acoustic signals of animals: recording, field measurements, analysis and description. In: Hopp SL, Owren MJ, Evans CS (eds) Animal acoustic communication: sound analysis and research methods. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  19. Gill D, Troyansky L, Nelken I (2000) Auditory localization using direction-dependent spectral information. Neurocomputing 32:767–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gold JI, Knudsen EI (1999) Hearing impairment induces frequency-specific adjustments in auditory spatial tuning in the optic tectum of young owls. J Neurophysiol 82:2197–2209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gold JI, Knudsen EI (2000) Abnormal auditory experience induces frequency-specific adjustments in unit tuning for binaural localization cues in the optic tectum of juvenile owls. J Neurosci 20:862–877PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hartley RS, Suthers RA (1987) The sound emission pattern and the acoustical role of the noseleaf in the echolocating bat, Carolia perspicillata. J Acoust Soc Am 82:1892–1900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoese WJ, Podos J, Boetticher NC, Nowicki S (2000) Vocal tract function in bird song production: experimental manipulation of beak movements. J Exp Biol 203:1845–1855PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hunter ML Jr, Kacelnik A, Roberts J, Vuillermoz M (1986) Directionality of avian vocalizations: a laboratory study. Condor 88:371–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Larsen ON, Dabelsteen T (1990) Directionality of blackbird vocalization. Implications for vocal communication and its further study. Ornis Scand 21:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD (1996) SAS© system for mixed models. SAS Institute, Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  27. Marler P (1955) Characteristics of some animal calls. Nature 176:6–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marler P (2004) Bird calls: a cornucopia for communication. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (eds) Nature’s music. Elsevier, London, pp 132–176Google Scholar
  29. Mathworks (1998) MATLAB. In: Mathworks, Natick, MAGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller P (2002) Mixed-directionality of killer whale stereotyped calls: a direction of movement cue? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moran MD (2003) Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100:403–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morton ES (1975) Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am Nat 109:17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morton ES (1982) Predictions from the ranging hypothesis for the evolution of long distance signals in birds. Behaviour 99:65–86Google Scholar
  34. Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15:1044–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nelson BS (2000) Avian dependence on sound pressure level as an auditory distance cue. Anim Behav 59:57–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nelson BS, Suthers RA (2004) Sound localization in a small passerine bird: discrimination of azimuth as a function of head orientation and sound frequency. J Exp Biol 207:4121–4133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nelson BS, Beckers GJL, Suthers RA (2005) Vocal tract filtering and sound radiation in a songbird. J Exp Biol 208:297–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nowicki S (1987) Vocal-tract resonances in oscine bird sound production—evidence from bird songs in a helium atmosphere. Nature 325:53–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Peek FW (1972) An experimental study of the territorial function of vocal and visual display in the male red-winged blackbird (Agelaius pheoniceus). Anim Behav 20:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Podos J (1997) A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Evolution 51:537–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Podos J (2001) Correlated evolution of morphology and vocal signature in Darwin’s finches. Nature 409:185–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richards DG, Wiley RH (1980) Reverberations and amplitude fluctuations in the propagation of sound in a forest: implications for animal communication. Am Nat 115:381–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Searcy WA (1989) Function of courtship vocalizations in red-winged blackbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24:325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Searcy WA, Brenowitz EA (1988) Sexual differences in species recognition of avian song. Nature 332:152–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Searcy WA, Yasukawa K (1995) Polygyny and sexual selection in red-winged blackbirds. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  46. Spiesberger JL, Fristrup KM (1990) Passive localization of calling animals and sensing of their acoustic environment using acoustic tomography. Am Nat 135:107–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Westneat MW, Long JH, Hoese WJ, Nowicki S (1993) Kinematics of birdsong: functional correlation of cranial movements and acoustic features in sparrows. J Exp Biol 182:147–171PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wiley RH, Richards DG (1982) Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection. In: Kroodsma D, Miller EH, Ouellet H (eds) Acoustic communication in birds. Academic, New York, pp 131–181Google Scholar
  49. Witkin SR (1977) The importance of directional sound radiation in avian vocalization. Condor 79:490–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yasukawa K, Searcy WA (1995) Red-winged blackbird. In: Poole A, Gill F (eds) The birds Of North America, vol 184. The Academy of Natural Sciences, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gail L. Patricelli
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marc S. Dantzker
    • 1
  • Jack W. Bradbury
    • 1
  1. 1.Macaulay Library, Cornell Lab of OrnithologyIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Section of Evolution and EcologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations