Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 70, Issue 12, pp 2149–2160 | Cite as

The “risky” business of singing: tactical use of song during joining by male humpback whales

Original Article

Abstract

Balancing the costs and benefits of emitting a mating signal is complex. There are direct costs, such as time taken away from essential activities like feeding, and indirect costs, such as attracting unintended receivers, who may gain advantageous information from eavesdropping. As a consequence, the signaler may reduce his chances of mating if the costs outweigh the benefits. Male humpback whales (Megaptera noveangliae) sing. Although it is still unclear whether this signal is aimed at males, females, or both, it is generally accepted this is a breeding signal emitted in the presence of females. This study tested the hypothesis that the cost of singing in humpback whales is attracting other competitors to the group and therefore reducing the chances of the singer successfully mating. Males should therefore “choose” to sing only if the social conditions are not “costly.” We found that males were less likely to sing when joining another group if there were two or more adults already in the group (other competitive males), if there was another singing male in the area (a known competitor), and in higher group densities (resulting in an increased likelihood of having another group, and therefore other competitive males close by). This result was confirmed in later years, where the density of whales had increased substantially but the probability of a male singing while joining other animals had reduced. These groups were more likely to be joined by additional animals in higher density, “riskier” conditions, especially if they included a whale that had joined the group previously while singing. It seems, therefore, that male humpback whales will join other animals while singing when the ‘audience’ comprises of fewer competitive males to reduce the potential cost of attracting eavesdroppers to the group.

Significance statement

The likelihood of a male joining a group while singing was tested against within-group dynamics (number of additional competitive males, presence of a calf), the presence of a nearby singing whale, the nearest neighbor, and the number of groups in the area (group density). Whales were more likely to join groups while singing if there were no other competitive males in the group and no calf, if there were no other singing whales in the area, and if group density was low. In later years, group density substantially increased, resulting in a decrease in the likelihood of a whale joining a group while singing. Results suggest male humpback whales are monitoring their audience composition (surrounding conspecifics) and using this information to make “vocal decisions” when joining a group containing a female.

Keywords

Audience effect Communication strategy Communication network Vocal eavesdropping Sexual signal 

References

  1. Alonso JC, Magana M, Palacin C, Martin CA (2010) Correlates of male mating success in great bustard leks: the effects of age, weight, and display effort. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:1589–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson S (1994) Costs of sexual advertising in the lekking Jackson widowbird. Condor 96:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Au WWL, Pack AA, Lammers MO, Herman LM, Deakos MH, Andrews K (2006) Acoustic properties of humpback whale songs. J Acoust Soc Am 120:1103–1110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker CS, Herman LM (1984) Aggressive-behavior between humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) wintering in Hawaiian waters. Can J Zool 62:1922–1937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balsby TJS, Dabelsteen T (2005) Simulated courtship interactions elicit neighbour intrusions in the whitethroat, Sylvia communis. Anim Behav 69:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown M, Corkeron P (1995) Pod characteristics of migrating humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) off the east Australian coast. Behaviour 132:163–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chittleborough RG (1958) The breeding cycle of the female humpback whale, Megaptera nodosa (Bonnaterre). Aust J Mar Fresh Res 9:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chu K, Harcourt P (1986) Behavioral correlations with aberrant patterns in humpback whale songs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:309–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clapham PJ (2000) The humpback whale. In: Mann J, O’Connor R, Tyack PL, Whitehead H (eds) Cetacean societies. Field studies of dolphins and whales. The University of Chicago Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark DL, Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2012) Eavesdropping and signal matching in visual courtship displays of spiders. Biol Lett 8:375–378CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark DL, Zeeff CK, Sabovodny G, Hollenberg A, Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2015) The role of social experience in eavesdropping by male wolf spiders (Lycosidae). Anim Behav 106:89–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cowles SA, Gibson RM (2015) Displaying to females may lower male foraging time and vigilance in a lekking bird. Auk 132:82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Craig AS, Herman LM, Gabriele CM, Pack AA (2003) Migratory timing of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the central North Pacific varies with age, sex and reproductive status. Behaviour 140:981–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dabelsteen T, McGregor PK, Holland J, Tobias JA, Pedersen SB (1997) The signal function of overlapping singing in male robins. Anim Behav 53:249–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darling JD, Bérubé M (2001) Interactions of singing humpback whales with other males. Mar Mammal Sci 17:570–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Darling JD, Jones ME, Nicklin CP (2006) Humpback whale songs: do they organize males during the breeding season? Behaviour 143:1051–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doutrelant C, McGregor PK (2000) Eavesdropping and mate choice in female fighting fish. Behaviour 137:1655–1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doutrelant C, McGregor PK, Oliveira RF (2001) The effect of an audience on intrasexual communication in male Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens. Behav Ecol 12:283–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunlop RA (2016) Changes in vocal parameters with social context in humpback whales: considering the effect of bystanders. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:857–870CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Dunlop RA, Noad MJ, Cato DH, Stokes D (2007) The social vocalization repertoire of east Australian migrating humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). J Acoust Soc Am 122:2893–2905CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Dunlop RA, Cato DH, Noad MJ (2008) Non-song acoustic communication in migrating humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). Mar Mammal Sci 24:613–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dunlop RA, Cato DH, Noad MJ (2010) Your attention please: increasing ambient noise levels elicits a change in communication behaviour in humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). Proc R Soc Lond B 277:2521–2529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunlop RA, Noad MJ, Cato DH (2013) Source levels of social sounds in migrating humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). J Acoust Soc Am 134:706–714CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Dzieweczynski TL, Earley RL, Green TM, Rowland WJ (2005) Audience effect is context dependent in Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens. Behav Ecol 16:1025–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Evans CS, Marler P (1994) Food calling and audience effects in male chickens, Gallus-gallus—their relationships to food availability, courtship and social facilitation. Anim Behav 47:1159–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Farr JA (1976) Social facilitation of male sexual-behavior, intra-sexual competition, and sexual selection in guppy, Poecilia reticulata (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Evolution 30:707–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fiske P, Rintamaki PT, Karvonen E (1998) Mating success in lekking males: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol 9:328–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Frankel AS, Clark CW, Herman LM, Gabriele CM (1995) Spatial-distribution, habitat utilization, and social interactions of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, off Hawaii, determined using acoustic and visual techniques. Can J Zool 73:1134–1146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grafen A (1990) Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol 144:517–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hedwig D, Mundry R, Robbins MM, Boesch C (2015) Audience effects, but not environmental influences, explain variation in gorilla close distance vocalizations—a test of the acoustic adaptation hypothesis. Am J Primatol 77:1239–1252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Laporte MNC, Zuberbühler K (2010) Vocal greeting behaviour in wild chimpanzee females. Anim Behav 80:467–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Matos RJ, McGregor PK (2002) The effect of the sex of an audience on male-male displays of Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens). Behaviour 139:1211–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maynard Smith J, Price GR (1973) The logic of animal conflict. Nature 246:15–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McDonald DB (1989) Correlates of male mating success in a lekking bird with male male cooperation. Anim Behav 37:1007–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Medrano L, Salinas M, Salas I, Deguevara PL, Aguayo A, Jacobsen J, Baker CS (1994) Sex identification of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, on the wintering grounds of the Mexican Pacific Ocean. Can J Zool 72:1771–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Milner RNC, Jennions MD, Backwell PRY (2010) Eavesdropping in crabs: an agency for lady detection. Biol Lett 6:755–757CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Morete ME, Bisi TL, Rosso S (2007) Temporal pattern of humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) group structure around Abrolhos Archipelago breeding region, Bahia, Brazil. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 87:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Noad MJ, Cato DH, Stokes MD (2004) Acoustic tracking of humpback whales: measuring interactions with the acoustic environment. In: Mee DJ, Hooker RJ, Hillock ID (eds) Acoustics 2004: transportation noise and vibration—the new millenium. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australian Acoustical Society. Australian Acoustical Society, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia, pp. 353–358Google Scholar
  39. Noad MJ, Dunlop RA, Paton D, Kniest H (2011) Abundance estimates of the east Australian humpback whale population: 2010 survey and update. Paper submitted to the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee, Tromsø, Norway, SC/63/SH22Google Scholar
  40. Peake TM, Terry AMR, McGregor PK, Dabelsteen T (2001) Male great tits eavesdrop on simulated male-to-male vocal interactions. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:1183–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peake TM, Matessi G, McGregor PK, Dabelsteen T (2005) Song type matching, song type switching and eavesdropping in male great tits. Anim Behav 69:1063–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Plath M, Strecker U (2008) Behavioral diversification in a young species flock of pupfish (Cyprionodon spp.): shoaling and aggressive behavior. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:1727–1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. R Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/
  44. Rekdahl ML, Dunlop RA, Noad MJ, Goldizen AW (2013) Temporal stability and change in the social call repertoire of migrating humpback whales. J Acoust Soc Am 133:1785–1795CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Rekdahl ML, Dunlop RA, Goldizen AW, Garland EC, Biassoni N, Miller P, Noad MJ (2015) Non-song social call bouts of migrating humpback whales. J Acoust Soc Am 137:3042–3053CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2005) Evolution of animal communication: reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  47. Silber GK (1986) The relationship of social vocalizations to surface behaviour and aggression in the Hawaiian humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Can J Zool 64:2075–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Slocombe KE, Zuberbühler K (2007) Chimpanzees modify recruitment screams as a function of audience composition. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104:17228–17233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Slocombe KE, Kaller T, Turman L, Townsend SW, Papworth S, Squibbs P, Zuberbühler K (2010) Production of food-associated calls in wild male chimpanzees is dependent on the composition of the audience. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:1959–1966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith JN, Goldizen AW, Dunlop RA, Noad MJ (2008) Songs of male humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, are involved in intersexual interactions. Anim Behav 76:467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Townsend SW, Deschner T, Zuberbühler K (2008) Female chimpanzees use copulation calls flexibly to prevent social competition. PLoS One 3:e2431CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. Townsend SW, Rasmussen M, Clutton-Brock T, Manser MB (2012) Flexible alarm calling in meerkats: the role of the social environment and predation urgency. Behav Ecol 23:1360–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Trivers RL (1972) Mother-offspring conflict. Am Zool 12:648–648Google Scholar
  54. Tyack P (1981) Interactions between singing Hawaiian humpback whales and conspecifics nearby. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tyack PL (1983) Differential response of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, to playback of song or social sounds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 13:49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tyack P, Whitehead H (1983) Male competition in large groups of wintering humpback whales. Behaviour 83:132–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ung D, Amy M, Leboucher G (2011) Heaven it's my wife! Male canaries conceal extra-pair courtships but increase aggressions when their mate watches. PLoS One 6:e22686CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Waas JR (1988) Acoustic displays facilitate courtship in little blue penguins, Eudyptula minor. Anim Behav 36:366–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wade MJ, Shuster SM, Demuth JP (2003) Sexual selection favors female-biased sex ratios: the balance between the opposing forces of sex-ratio selection and sexual selection. Am Nat 162:403–414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Ward S, Speakman JR, Slater PJB (2003) The energy cost of song in the canary, Serinus canaria. Anim Behav 66:893–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Winn HE, Winn LK (1978) Song of humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae in West Indies. Mar Biol 47:97–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zajonc RB (1965) Social facilitation. Science 149:269–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Zuberbühler K (2008) Audience effects. Curr Biol 18:R189–R190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cetacean Ecology and Acoustics Laboratory, School of Veterinary ScienceThe University of QueenslandGattonAustralia

Personalised recommendations