Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2002 Sep 7;269(1502):1847–1852. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2092

Non-parallel coevolution of sender and receiver in the acoustic communication system of treefrogs.

Johannes Schul 1, Sarah L Bush 1
PMCID: PMC1691097  PMID: 12350274

Abstract

Advertisement calls of closely related species often differ in quantitative features such as the repetition rate of signal units. These differences are important in species recognition. Current models of signal-receiver coevolution predict two possible patterns in the evolution of the mechanism used by receivers to recognize the call: (i) classical sexual selection models (Fisher process, good genes/indirect benefits, direct benefits models) predict that close relatives use qualitatively similar signal recognition mechanisms tuned to different values of a call parameter; and (ii) receiver bias models (hidden preference, pre-existing bias models) predict that if different signal recognition mechanisms are used by sibling species, evidence of an ancestral mechanism will persist in the derived species, and evidence of a pre-existing bias will be detectable in the ancestral species. We describe qualitatively different call recognition mechanisms in sibling species of treefrogs. Whereas Hyla chrysoscelis uses pulse rate to recognize male calls, Hyla versicolor uses absolute measurements of pulse duration and interval duration. We found no evidence of either hidden preferences or pre-existing biases. The results are compared with similar data from katydids (Tettigonia sp.). In both taxa, the data are not adequately explained by current models of signal-receiver coevolution.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (151.8 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bush S. L., Dyson M. L., Halliday T. R. Selective phonotaxis by males in the Majorcan midwife toad. Proc Biol Sci. 1996 Jul 22;263(1372):913–917. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1996.0135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Diekamp B., Gerhardt H. C. Selective phonotaxis to advertisement calls in the grey treefrog Hyla versicolor: behavioral experiments and neurophysiological correlates. J Comp Physiol A. 1995;177(2):173–190. doi: 10.1007/BF00225097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Enquist M., Arak A. Selection of exaggerated male traits by female aesthetic senses. Nature. 1993 Feb 4;361(6411):446–448. doi: 10.1038/361446a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gerhardt H. C., Schul J. A quantitative analysis of behavioral selectivity for pulse rise-time in the gray treefrog, Hyla versicolor. J Comp Physiol A. 1999 Jul;185(1):33–40. doi: 10.1007/s003590050363. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Keller M. J., Gerhardt H. C. Polyploidy alters advertisement call structure in gray treefrogs. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Feb 22;268(1465):341–345. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ryan M. J., Fox J. H., Wilczynski W., Rand A. S. Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Nature. 1990 Jan 4;343(6253):66–67. doi: 10.1038/343066a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Wasserman A. O. Polyploidy in the common tree toad Hyla versicolor Le Conte. Science. 1970 Jan 23;167(3917):385–386. doi: 10.1126/science.167.3917.385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES