Advertisement

Naturwissenschaften

, 95:981 | Cite as

Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) wing-whistles may contain threat-related information for con- and hetero-specifics

  • Seth W. Coleman
Short Communication

Abstract

Distinct acoustic whistles are associated with the wing-beats of many doves, and are especially noticeable when doves ascend from the ground when startled. I thus hypothesized that these sounds may be used by flock-mates as cues of potential danger. To test this hypothesis, I compared the responses of mourning doves (Zenaida macroura), northern cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis), and house sparrows (Passer domesticus) to audio playbacks of dove ‘startle wing-whistles’, cardinal alarm calls, dove ‘nonstartle wing-whistles’, and sparrow ‘social chatter’. Following playbacks of startle wing-whistles and alarm calls, conspecifics and heterospecifics startled and increased vigilance more than after playbacks of other sounds. Also, the latency to return to feeding was greater following playbacks of startle wing-whistles and alarm calls than following playbacks of other sounds. These results suggest that both conspecifics and heterospecifics may attend to dove wing-whistles in decisions related to antipredator behaviors. Whether the sounds of dove wing-whistles are intentionally produced signals warrants further testing.

Keywords

Animal communication Alarm calls Anti-predator behavior Sonation 

Notes

Acknowledgement

Thanks to K. Bostwick, D. Lank, and several anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on previous versions of the manuscript. S.W.C. is funded by an individual National Research Service Award from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, USA. All experiments described here comply with state and federal animal care and use protocols.

References

  1. Baptista LF, Matsui M (1979) The source of the dive-noise of the Anna's Hummingbird. Condor 81:87–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckers GJL, Goossens BMA, ten Cate C (2003) Perceptual salience of acoustic differences between conspecific and allospecific vocalizations in African collared-doves. Anim Behav 65:605–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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
  4. Borgia G (2006) Preexisting male traits are important in the evolution of elaborated male sexual display. Adv Study Behav 36:249–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgia G, Coleman SW (2000) Co-option of male courtship signals from aggressive display in bowerbirds. Proc Roy Soc Lond Ser B 267:1735–1740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bostwick KS (2006) Mechanisms of feather sonation in Aves: unanticipated levels of diversity. Acta Zool Sin 52s:68–71Google Scholar
  7. Bostwick KS, Prum RO (2003) High-speed video analysis of wing-snapping in two manakin clades (Pipridae: Aves). J Exp Biol 206:3693–3706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bostwick KS, Prum RO (2005) Courting bird sings with stridulating wing feathers. Science 309:736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal Communication. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  10. Catchpole CK (1989) Pseudoreplication and external validity: playback experiments in avian bioacoustics. TREE 4:286–287Google Scholar
  11. de Kort SR, den Hartog PM, ten Cate C (2002a) Diverge or merge? The effect of sympatric occurrence on the territorial vocalizations of the vinaceous dove Streptopelia vinacea and the ring-necked dove S. capicola. J Avian Biol 33:150–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Kort SR, den Hartog PM, ten Cate C (2002b) Vocal signals, isolation and hybridization in the vinaceous dove (Streptopelia vinacea) and the ring-necked dove (S. capicola). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:378–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. den Hartog PM, de Kort SR, ten Cate C (2007) Hybrid vocalizations are effective within, but not outside, an avian hybrid zone. Behav Ecol 18:608–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ehrlich PR, Dobkin DS, Wheye D (1988) The birder’s handbook. Simon and Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Frith H (1982) Pigeons and doves of Australia. Rigby, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  16. Gibbs D, Barnes E, Cox J (2001) Pigeons and doves: a guide to the pigeons and doves of the world. Pica, SussexGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodwin D (1983) Pigeons and doves of the world. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  18. Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hebets EA, Uetz GW (1999) Female responses to isolated signals from multimodal male courtship displays in the wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim Behav 57:865–872PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huber F, Moore TE (1989) Cricket behavior and neurobiology. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  21. Hurlbert SH (1984) Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecol Monogr 54:187–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnsgard PA (1983) The grouse of the world. University of Nebraska Press, LincolnGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson KP, de Kort S, Dinwoodey K, Mateman AC, ten Cate C, Lessells CM, Clayton DH (2001) A molecular phylogeny of the dove genera Streptopelia and Columba. Auk 118:874–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kroodsma DE (1989) Suggested experimental designs for song playbacks. Anim Behav 37:600–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (2004) Nature's music: the science of birdsong. Elsevier, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  26. Miller SJ, Inouye DW (1983) Roles of the wing-whistle in the territorial behaviour of male Broad-tailed Hummingbirds (Selasphorus platycercus). Anim Behav 31:689–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nealen PM, Breitwisch R (1997) Northern cardinal sexes defend nests equally. Wilson Bull 109:269–278Google Scholar
  28. 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
  29. Phelps SM, Rand AS, Ryan MJ (2007) The mixed-species chorus as public information: tungara frogs eavesdrop on a heterospecific. Behav Ecol 18:108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Prum RO (1998) Sexual selection and the evolution of mechanical sound production in manakins (Aves: Pipridae). Anim Behav 55:977–994PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pytte C, Ficken MS (1994) Aerial display sounds of the Black-chinned Hummingbird. Condor 96:1088–1091CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rogers TL (1940) The dive note of the Anna Hummingbird. Condor 42:86Google Scholar
  33. Scheffer SJ, Uetz GW, Stratton GE (1996) Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signaling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:17–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1987) Introduction to biostatistics. W. H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Templeton CN, Greene E (2007) Nuthatches eavesdrop on variations in heterospecific chickadee mobbing alarm calls. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:5479–5482PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vitousek MN, Adelman JS, Gregory NC, St Clair JJH (2007) Heterospecific alarm call recognition in a non-vocal reptile. Biol Lett 3:632–634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wells S, Baptista LF (1979) Displays and morphology of an Anna x Allen Hummingbird hybrid. Wilson Bull 91:524–532Google Scholar
  38. Wells J, Wells A (2001) Pigeons and doves. In: Elphick C, Dunning J, Sibley D (eds) The sibley guide to bird life and behavior. Alfred A. Knopf, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyTexas A and M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Centro de Investigación Científica de las Huastecas “Aguazarca”CalnaliMexico

Personalised recommendations