Phonotactic selectivity in two cryptic species of gray treefrogs: Effects of differences in pulse rate, carrier frequency and playback level

22Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The two main spectral components of the advertisement calls of two species of North American gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis and H. versicolor) overlap broadly in frequency, and the frequency of each component matches the sensitivity of one of the two different auditory inner ear organs. The calls of the two species differ in the shape and repetition rate (pulse rate) of sound pulses within trills. Standard synthetic calls with one of these spectral peaks and the pulse rate typical of conspecific calls were tested against synthetic alternatives that had the same spectral peak but a different pulse rate. The results were generalized over a wide range of playback levels. Selectivity based on differences in pulse rate depended on which spectral peak was used in some tests, and greater pulse-rate selectivity was usually observed when the low-frequency rather than the high-frequency peak was used. This effect was more pronounced and occurred over a wider range of playback levels in H. versicolor than in H. chrysoscelis when the pulse rate of the alternative was higher than that of the standard call. In tests at high playback levels with an alternative of 15 pulses s-1, however, females of H. versicolor showed greater selectivity for the standard call when the high-frequency rather than the low-frequency spectral peak was used. This last result may reflect the different ways in which females of the two species assess trains of pulses, and the broad implications for understanding the underlying auditory mechanisms are discussed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gerhardt, H. C. (2008). Phonotactic selectivity in two cryptic species of gray treefrogs: Effects of differences in pulse rate, carrier frequency and playback level. Journal of Experimental Biology, 211(16), 2609–2616. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.019612

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free