Advertisement

Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 63, Issue 3, pp 321–331 | Cite as

Crepuscular Changes in Emission Rate and Parameters of the Boatwhistle Advertisement Call of the Gulf Toadfish, Opsanus Beta

  • Robert F. Thorson
  • Michael L. Fine
Article

Abstract

We quantified crepuscular variation in the emission rate and call properties of the boatwhistle advertisement call of Gulf toadfish, Opsanus beta, from a field recording of a natural population of nesting males in the Florida Keys. Their calls are more variable and complex than previously reported. A call typically starts with a grunt followed by one to five tonal boop notes (typically two or three) and lasts for over a second. The first boop is considerably longer than later ones, and intervals between boops are relatively constant until the final interval, which approximately doubles in duration. Positions of fish are fixed and calls are sufficiently variable that we could discern individual callers in field recordings. Calling rate increases after sunset when males tend to produce shorter calls with fewer notes. Analysis by number of notes per call indicates some individuals decrease the number of initial grunts and the duration of the first note, but most of the decrease results from fewer notes. To our knowledge this sort of call plasticity has not been demonstrated before in fishes. We suggest that call shortening lowers the chances of overlapping calls of other males and that the small amount of time actually spent producing sound (total on time) is an adaptation to prevent fatigue in sonic muscles adapted for speed but not endurance.

sound production acoustic communication mate choice sonic muscle 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Appelt, D., V. Shen & C. Franzini-Armstrong. 1991. Quantitation of Ca ATPase, feet andmitochondria in super fast muscle fibers from the toadfish, Opsanus tau. J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 12: 543–552.Google Scholar
  2. Barimo, J.F. & M.L. Fine. 1998. Relationship of swim-bladder shape to the directionality pattern of underwater soundin the oyster toadfish. Can. J. Zool. 76: 134–143.Google Scholar
  3. Bass, A.H., M. Marchaterre & R. Baker. 1994.Vocal-acoustic pathways in a teleost fish. J. Neurosci. 14: 4025–4039.Google Scholar
  4. Bendix, Jr., J.H. & P.M. Narins.1999. Competitive calling behavior by male treefrogs, Eleutherodactylus coqui (Anura: Leptodactylidae). Copeia 1999: 1118–1122.Google Scholar
  5. Breder, C. Jr. 1968. Seasonal and diurnal occurrences of fish sounds in a small Florida Bay. Bull.Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 138: 325–378.Google Scholar
  6. Fawcett, D.W. & J.P. Revel. 1961. The sarcoplasmic reticulum of afast-acting muscle. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol. 10(Suppl): 89–109.Google Scholar
  7. Feher, J.J., T.D. Waybright & M.L. Fine 1998. Comparison of sarcoplasmic reticulum capabilities in toadfish (Opsanus tau) sonic muscle and rat fast twitch muscle. J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 19: 661–674.Google Scholar
  8. Fine, M.L. 1978. Seasonal and geographic variationof the mating call of the oyster toadfish Opsanus tau. Oecologia 36: 45–57.Google Scholar
  9. Fine, M.L. 1979. Geographicalvariation in sound production evoked by brain stimulation in the oyster toadfish. Naturwissenschaften 65: 493.Google Scholar
  10. Fine, M.L. & M.L. Lenhardt. 1983. Shallow-water propagation of the toadfish mating call. Comp. Biochem.Physiol. 76A: 225–231.Google Scholar
  11. Fine, M.L., B. Bernard & T.M. Harris. 1993. Functional morphology of toadfishsonic muscle fibers: relationship to possible fiber division. Can. J. Zool. 71: 2262–2274.Google Scholar
  12. Fine, M.L., H.E. Winn& B.L. Olla. 1977a. Communication in fishes. pp. 472–518. In: T.A. Sebeok (ed.) How Animals Communicate, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  13. Fine, M.L., L. Joest, H.E. Winn & P.J. Perkins. 1977b.Temporal aspects of calling behavior in the oyster toadfish, Opsanus tau. U.S. Fish. Bull. 75: 871–874.Google Scholar
  14. Fish, J.F.1972. The effect of sound playback on the toadfish. pp. 386–434. In: H.E. Winn & B.L. Olla (ed.) Behavior of Marine Animals, Vol. 2, Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Fish, M.P. 1954. Character and significance of soundproduction among fishes of the Western North Atlantic. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. 14: 1–109.Google Scholar
  16. Franzini-Armstrong, C. & G. Nunzi. 1983. Junctional feet and particles in the triads of a fast-twich muscle fiber. J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil. 4: 233–252.Google Scholar
  17. Gray, G.A. & H.E. Winn. 1961. Reproductive ecology and sound productionof the toadfish Opsanus tau. Ecology 28: 274–282.Google Scholar
  18. Hawkins, A.D. 1986. Underwater sound and fishbehavior. pp. 114–151. In: T.J. Pitcher (ed.) Behavior of Teleost Fishes, Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
  19. Loesser, K.E., J. Rafi & M.L. Fine. 1997. Embryonic, juvenile, and adult development of the toadfish sonic muscle.Anat. Rec. 249: 469–477.Google Scholar
  20. McKibben, J.R. & A.H. Bass. 1998. Behavioral assessment of acousticparameters relevant to signal recognition and preference in a vocal fish. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 104: 3520–3533.Google Scholar
  21. Mitchell, S. 1997. Muscle fatigue and glycogen levels in the sonic swimbladder muscle of the oyster toadfish (Opsanustau). Master's Thesis, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond. 80 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Myrberg, Jr. A.A. 1981. Soundcommunication and interception in fishes. pp. 395–426. In: W.N. Tavolga, A.N. Popper & R.R Fay (ed.) Hearing and Sound Communication in Fishes, Springer Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Prestwich, K.N. 1994. The energetics of acousticsignalling in anurans and insects. Amer. Zool. 34: 625–643.Google Scholar
  24. Rome, L.C. & S.L. Lindstedt. 1998. Thequest for speed: muscles built for high-frequency contractions. News Physiol. Sci. 13: 261–268.Google Scholar
  25. Rome, L.C.,D.A. Syme, S. Hollingworth., S.L. Lindstedt & S.M. Baylor. 1996. The whistle and the rattle: the design of sound producing muscles. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 93: 8095–8100.Google Scholar
  26. Rome, L.C., C. Cook, D.A. Syme, M.A. Connaughton, M. Ashley-Ross, A. Klimov, B. Tikunov & Y.E. Goldman. 1999. Trading force for speed: why superfast crossbridge kinetics leads to superlow forces. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 96: 5826–5831.Google Scholar
  27. Tavolga, W.N.1958. Underwater sounds produced by two species of toadfish Opsanus tau and Opsanus beta. Bull. Mar. Sci. 8: 278–284.Google Scholar
  28. Tavolga, W.N. 1964. Sonic characteristics and mechanisms in marine fishes. pp. 195–211. In:W.N. Tavolga (ed.) Marine Bio-Acoustics, Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Tavolga, W.N. 1971. Soundproduction and detection. pp. 135–205. In: W.S. Hoar & D.J. Randall (ed.) Fish Physiology, Vol. 5, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Winn, H.E. 1964. The biological significance of fish sounds. pp. 213–231. In:W.N. Tavolga (ed.) Marine Bio-Acoustics, Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Winn, H.E. 1967. Vocalfacilitation and the biological significance of toadfish sounds. pp. 213–231. In: W.N. Tavolga (ed.) Marine Bio-Acoustics, Vol. 2, Pergamon Press, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Winn, H.E. 1972. Acoustic discrimination by the toadfish withcomments on signal systems. pp. 361–385. In: H.E. Winn & B.L. Olla (ed.) Behavior of Marine Animals: Current Perspectives in Research, Vol. 2, Vertebrates, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Zelick, R., D. Mann & A.N. Popper.1999. Acoustic communication in fishes and frogs. pp. 363–411. In: R.R. Fay & A.N. Popper (ed.) Comparative Hearing: Fish and Amphibians, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations