Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Tradeoffs in the evolution of frog calls

  • Published:
Proceedings: Animal Sciences

Abstract

All biological characteristics are subject to conflicting selection pressures. This is particularly true of those characteristics that are subject to sexual selection. The classic example is the peacock’s tail. Others are the calls used by male frogs and toads to attract their mates. The forces which have acted in the evolution of these calls are varied and the calls that we hear made by these animals are diverse.

Two kinds of factors can be recognized: constraints and forces. Constraints on the kind of a call that a frog might evolve include its phylogeny, the energy required to produce different kinds of calls, the risks incurred from attracting predators. Also important is the morphology of the frog: both the structures used by the males to make the calls and the apparatus with which the females hear the calls. For example, frog size has an important influence both on the frequencies of the sounds that a frog produces and the acuity with which they are heard. Both passive and active selective forces can be identified. Passive forces include the distances that environments transmit sounds of different frequencies and the interference from other sounds that calls encounter. Active forces include the reactions of conspecific males and females to the calls. Males interact acoustically in a variety of ways to organize their choruses in both space and time. They position themselves, and time their calls so that they minimize the interference from other males while maximizing their chances of securing a mate. Female choice has been studied in test arenas. Females choose louder calls, calls that are most easily located, and the calls of their own rather than other species. In choosing among males of their own species, females have been shown to pick the males controlling the best resources, sometimes using calls to do so. They should also be expected to choose those males who can contribute the best genes to their offspring. The extent to which they do this and the role of calls in choosing is actively being argued.

Sexual selection, both interactions between males and female choice, have undoubtedly been important in the evolution of frog calls but only within the constraints imposed by a variety of other factors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arak A 1983a Male-male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians; inMate Choice (ed. P Bateson (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge) pp. 181–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Arak A 1983b Sexual selection by male-male competition in naterjack toad choruses;Nature (London) 306 261–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Awbrey F T 1978 Social interaction among chorusing Pacific treefrogs,Hyla regilla; Copeia 1978 208–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrio A 1965 El generoPhysalaemus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) en la Argentina;Physis 25 421–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrio A 1967 Notas complementarias sobre el generoPhysalaemus Fitzingeri (Anura, Leptodactylidae);Physis 27 5–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair W F 1964 Isolating mechanisms and interspecific interactions in anuran amphibians:Quart. Rev. Biol. 39 334–344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blair W F 1968 Amphibians and reptiles; inAnimal Communication, (ed.) T A Sebeok (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Ind.) pp. 289–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair W F 1974 Character displacement in frogs;Am. Zool. 14 1119–1125

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogert C M 1960 The influence of sound on amphibians and reptiles; inAnimals sounds and communication (eds) W E Lanyon and Tavolga (American Inst. Biol. Sci., Washington, D.C.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenowitz E A 1982 Long-range communication of species identity by song in the Red-winged Blackbird;Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 10 29–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucher T L, Ryan M L and Bartholomew G A 1982 Oxygen consumption during resting, calling and nest building in the frog,Physalaemus pustulosus;Physiol. Zool. 55 10–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Capranica R P 1965The evoked vocal response of the bullfrog: a study of communication by sound M.I.T. Research Mongraph 33

  • Capranica R P 1976 Morphology and physiology of the auditory system; inFrog neurobiology, (eds) R Llinas and W Precht (Berlin: Springer)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cody M L and Brown J H 1969 Song asynchrony in neighbouring bird species.Nature (London) 22 778–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies N B and Halliday T R 1977 Optimal mate selection in the toadBufo bufo;Nature (London) 269 56–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies N B and Halliday T R 1979 Competitive mate searching in male common toadsBufo bufo;Animal Behavior. 27 1253–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty J A and Gerhardt H C 1983 Hybrid tree frogs: vocalizations of males and selective phonotaxis of females;Science 220 1078–1080

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drewry G E and Rand A S 1983 Characteristics of an acoustic community: Puerto Rican frogs of the genusEleutherodactylus; Copeia 941–953

  • Duellman W E and Pyles R A 1983 Acoustic resource partitioning in anuran communities.Copeia 639–649

  • Ehret G and Gerhardt H C 1980 Auditory masking and effects of noise on responses of the green treefrog(Hyla cinerea) to synthetic mating calls;J. Comp. Physiol. 141 13–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher R A 1930 (1958)The genetical theory of natural selection (New York: Dover Publ.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fouquette M J Jr 1975 Speciation in chorus frogs. I. Reproductive character displacement in thePseudacris nigrita complex;Syst. Zool. 24 16–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1974 The significance of some spectral features in mating call recognition in the green treefrog(Hyla cinerea);J. Exp. Biol. 61 229–241

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1975 Sound pressure levels and radiation patterns of the vocalizations of some North American frogs and toads;J. Comp. Physiol. 102 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1976 Significance of two frequency bands in long distance vocal communication in the green treefrog.Nature (London) 261 692–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1978 Mating call recognition in the green treefrog(Hyla cinerea): the significance of some fine-temporal properties;J. Exp. Biol. 74 59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1981 Mating call recognition in the green treefrog(Hyla cinerea): importance of two frequency bands as a function of sound pressure levels;J. Comp. Physiol. 144 9–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C 1982 Sound pattern recognition in some North American treefrogs (Anura: Hylidae): implications for mate choice;Am, Zool. 22 581–595

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C and Rheinlander J 1980 Accuracy of sound localization in a miniature dendrobatid frog;Naturwissenschaften 67 362–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt H C and Schneider H 1980 Mating call discrimination by females of the treefrogHyla meridionalis on Tenerife;Behav. Processes 5 143–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gish S L and Morton E S 1981 Structural adaptations to local habitat acoustics in Carolina Wren songs,Z. Tierpsychol. 56 74–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard R D 1978a The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs,Rana catesbeiana; Evolution 32 850–871

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard R D 1978b Factors influencing early embryo mortality in bullfrogs;Ecology 59 789–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konishi M 1970 Evolution of design features in the coding of species-specificity;Am. Zool. 10 67–72

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Licht L E 1976 Sexual selection in toads (Bufo americanus);Can J. Zool 54 1277–1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn M J 1959 Call differentiation in a complex of seven species ofCrinia (Anura, Leptodactylidae);Evolution 13 452–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn M J 1965 Premating isolation in the Hyla ewingi complex (Anura, Hylidae);Evolution 19 234–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn M J 1977 Long-range acoustic communication in anurans: an integrated and evolutionary approach; inThe reproductive biology of amphibians (eds) D H Taylor and S I Guttman (New York: Plenum Publ. Corp.) pp. 263–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn M J and Loftus-Hills J J 1968 An experimental evaluation of premating isolation in theHyla ewingi complex (Anura: Hylidae);Evolution 22 659–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus-Hills J J 1973 Comparative aspects of auditory function in Australian anurans;Aust. J. Zool. 21 353–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loftus-Hills J J and Littlejohn M J 1971 Mating-call sound intensities of anuran amphibians;J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49 1327–1329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch J D 1970 Systematic status of the American Leptodactylid frog generaEngystomops, Eupemphix, andPhysalaemus; Copeia 488–496

  • MacKinnon J 1974 The behaviour and ecology of wild orang-utans(Pongo pygmaeus);Anim. Behav. 22 3–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacNally R C 1981 On the reproductive energetics of chorusing males: energy depletion profiles, restoration and growth in two sympatric species ofRanidella (Anura);Oecologia (Berl.) 51 181–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marler P 1955 Characteristics of some animal calls.Nature (London) 176 6–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin W F 1972 Evolution of vocalization in the genusBufo; inEvolution in the genus Bufo, (ed.) W F Blair (Univ. Texas Press, Austin) pp. 279–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton E S 1975 Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds;Am. Nat. 109 17–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan M 1963 Inter-specific relations between some Andean birds;Am. Natur. 5 327–339

    Google Scholar 

  • Narins P M 1982 Effect of masking noise on evoked calling in the Puerto Rican coqui (Anura: Leptodactylidae);J. Comp. Physiol. 147 439–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narins P M and Capranica R R 1976 Sexual differences in the auditory system of the treefrog,Eleutherodactylus coqui;Science 192 378–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E 1969 Discussion on the systematic significance of isolating mechanisms, inSystematic biology (Proc. Intern. Conf. Nat. Acad. Sci., Washington, D. C.) pp. 485–489

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevo E 1973 Adaptive variation in the size of cricket frogs;Ecology 54 1271–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker G A 1983 Mate quality and mating decisions, inMate Choice, (ed.) P Bateson (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press) pp. 141–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Passmore N I 1976 Vocalizations and breeding behaviour ofPtychadena taenioscelis (Anura: Ranidae);Zool. Afr. 11 339–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Passmore N I 1981 Sound levels of mating calls of some African frogs;Herpetologica 37 166–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Passmore N I 1981 The relevance of the specific mate recognition concept to anuran reproductive biology;Mon. Zool. Ital. 6 93–108

    Google Scholar 

  • Passmore N I and Carruther V C 1979South African Frogs (Johannesburg: Witwatersrand Univ. Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson H E H 1978 More evidence against speciation by reinforcement;S. Afr. J. Sci. 74 369–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson H E H 1981 The continuing search for the unknown and unknowable. A critique of contemporary ideas on speciation;S. Afr. J. Sci. 77 143–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrill S A, Gerhardt H C and Daniel R 1978 Sexual parasitism in the green treefrog,Hyla cinerea;Science 200 1179–1180

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Porter K R 1966 Mating calls of six Mexican and Central American toads;Herpetologica 22 60–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter K R 1968 Evolutionary status of a relict population of Bufo hemiophrys Cope;Evolution 22 583–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rand A S 1983Physalaemus pustulosus (Rana, Sapito Tungara, Foam Toad, Mud-puddle Frog); inCosta Rican Natural History. (ed.) D H Janzen (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand A S and Ryan M J 1981 The adaptive significance of a complex vocal repertoire in a neotropical frog;Z. Tierpsychol. 57 209–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J 1980 Female mate choice in a neotropical frog;Science 209 523–525

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J 1983 Sexual selection and communication in a neotropical frog,Physalaemus pustulosus; Evolution 37 261–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J 1985The tungara frog: a study of sexual selection and communication (Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J, Bartholomew G A and Rand A S 1983 Energetics of reproduction in a neotropical frog,Physalaemus pustulosas; Ecology 64 1456–1462

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J and Brenowitz E A 1985 The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song;Am. Nat. 126

  • Ryan M J, Tuttle M D and Rand A S 1982 Bat predation and sexual advertisement in a neotropical anuran;Am. Nat. 119 136–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M J, Tuttle M D and Taft L K 1981 The costs and benefits of frog chorusing behavior;Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 8 273–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage M R 1962The ecology and life history of the common frog (Rana temporaria temporaria); (New York: Hafner Publ. Co.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiotz A 1967 The treefrogs (Rachophoridae) of West Africa;Spolia Zool. Mus. Hauniensis 25 1–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiotz A 1973 Evolution of anuran mating calls: ecological aspects; inEvolutionary biology of the anurans: contemporary research on major problems (ed.) J L Vial (Colombia: Univ. Missouri Press) pp. 311–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider H 1977 Acoustic behavior and physiology of vocalization in the European treefrog,Hyla arborea (L); inThe reproductive biology of amphibians (eds) D H Taylor and S I Guttman (New York: Plenum Publ. Corp.) pp. 263–294

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz J J and Wells K D 1985 Intra-and interspecific vocal behavior of the neotropical treefrogHyla microcephala; Copeia (in press)

  • Shine R 1979 Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the amphibia;Copeia 297–306

  • Straughan I R 1973 Evolution of anuran mating calls: bioacoustical aspects; inEvolutionary biology of the anurans: contemporary research on major problems (ed.) J L Vial (Colombia: Univ. Missouri Press) pp. 311–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan B K 1982 Significance of size, temperature and call attributes to sexual selection inBufo woodhousei australis;J. Herpetol. 16 103–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuttle M D and Ryan M J 1981 Bat predation and the evolution of frog vocalizations in the neotropics;Science 214 677–678

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tuttle M D and Ryan M J 1982 The role of synchronized calling, ambient light, and ambient noise, in anti-bat-predator behavior of a treefrog;Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol 11 125–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waser P M and Waser M S 1977 Experimental studies of primate vocalization: specializations for long distance propagation.Z. Tierpsychol 43 239–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells K D 1977a The social behaviour of anuran amphibians;Anim. Behav. 25 666–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells K D 1977b The courtship of frogs; inThe reproductive biology of amphibians (eds) D H Taylor and S I Guttman pp. 233–261

  • Wells K D and Schwartz J J 1984 Vocal communication in a neotropical frog,Hyla ebraccata; Behaviour (in press)

  • West-Eberhard M J 1983 Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation;Q. Rev. Biol. 58 155–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilbur H M, Rubenstein D I and Fairchild L 1978 Sexual selection in toads: the roles of female choice and male body size;Evolution 32 264–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilczynski W E, Brenowitz E A and Zakon A 1984 Acoustic communication in spring peepers,Hyla crucifer. call characteristics and neurophysiology aspects;J. Comp. Physiol A155 577–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilczynski W E and Capranica R R 1984 The auditory system of anuran amphibians;Prog. Neurobiol. 22 1–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley R H and Richards D G 1982 Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection; inAcoustic communication in birds (eds) D E Kroodsma and Miller (New York: Academic Press) Vol1, pp. 131–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelick R D and Narins P M 1982 Analysis of acoustically evoked call suppression behavior in a neotropical treefrog;Anim, Behav. 30 728–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman B L 1983 A comparison of structural features of calls of open and forest habitat frog species in the central Amazon;Herpetological 39 235–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Zweifel R G 1968 Effects of temperature, body size and hybridization on mating calls of toads,Bufo a. americanus andBufo woodhousii fowleri; Copeia 269–285

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa, Panama, Central America

    A Stanley Rand

Authors
  1. A Stanley Rand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rand, A.S. Tradeoffs in the evolution of frog calls. Proc Ani Sci 94, 623–637 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03191864

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03191864

Keywords

Search

Navigation