spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online August 17, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 2990-2998 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.006312
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JEB
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gerhardt, H. C.
Right arrow Articles by Murphy, C. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gerhardt, H. C.
Right arrow Articles by Murphy, C. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Preferences based on spectral differences in acoustic signals in four species of treefrogs (Anura: Hylidae)

H. Carl Gerhardt1,*, Carlos C. Martínez-Rivera1, Joshua J. Schwartz2, Vincent T. Marshall3 and Christopher G. Murphy4

1 Division of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA
2 Department of Biology and Health Sciences, Pace University, Pleasantville, NY 10570, USA
3 Beckman Institute, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
4 Department of Biology, James Madison University, MSC 7801, Harrisonburg, VA 22807, USA


Figure 1
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Proportions of females choosing bimodal over unimodal alternatives. Numbers above symbols show the sample size (number of females responding). Circles, alternative to bimodal stimulus had only the high-frequency peak; squares, alternative to bimodal stimulus had only the low-frequency peak. SPLs equalized at 85 dB SPL except for tests of H. avivoca; the bimodal stimulus was 86 dB SPL and the single-peaked calls, 83 dB SPL (see the text for the rationale). Error bars are 95% credible intervals; if there is a single error bar, there was a significant (P<0.05) preference in a two-tailed binomial test. *Previously published data re-plotted (Gerhardt, 2005bGo); see text. NW, northwestern mtDNA lineage; E, eastern mtDNA lineage as defined by Ptacek et al. (Ptacek et al., 1994Go).

 

Figure 2
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Proportions of females choosing unimodal high-frequency calls over unimodal low-frequency calls at 85 dB SPL. NW, northwestern mtDNA lineage; SW, southwestern mtDNA lineage; E, eastern mtDNA lineage as defined by Ptacek et al. (Ptacek et al., 1994Go); NC, North Carolina; MO, Missouri. *The P-value of a two-tailed binomial test was 0.0495, even though the upper 95% credible limit was 52.2%, almost the same as that for the non-significant (P>0.05) result for tests of females from MO.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (6K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Proportions of females of H. versicolor (NW mtDNA lineage) and H. chrysoscelis from Missouri choosing unimodal high-frequency calls over unimodal low-frequency calls at different playback levels.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2007