Auditory Processing of Vocal Signals in Anurans

  • Robert R. Capranica

Abstract

Acoustic signaling between animals involves a rather remarkable cooperative communication channel. It enables rapid transfer of information over a considerable distance in which the sender and receiver need not be in visible contact, such as through dense foliage or in total darkness. The “information” within an acoustic signal is conveyed by the temporal and spectral pattern of sound pressure that the sender must control in order to transmit a “meaningful” message. The receiver, in turn, must possess a receptor apparatus that is sensitive to these incoming pressure variations as well as a nervous system that can decode them. But communication rarely occurs in isolation. In general there is an ambient background of other sounds from other sources that we collectively refer to as “noise” and that interferes with detection of those signals of interest. This is a universal problem that all animals face in communicating with other members of their own species.

Keywords

Tuning Curve Auditory Nerve Fiber Advertisement Call Frequency Sensitivity Vocal Signal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blair, W. F. 1958. Mating call in the speciation of anuran amphibians. Am. Natur. 92:27–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blair, W. F., and M. J. Littlejohn. 1960. Stage of speciation of two allopatric populations of chorus frogs (Pseudacris). Evolution 14:82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bogert, C. M. 1960. The influence of sound on the behavior of amphibians and reptiles. IN: W. E. Lanyon and W. N. Tavolga (eds.), Animal sounds and communication. Am. Inst. Biol. Sci., Washington, D. C., pp. 137–320.Google Scholar
  4. Capranica, R. R. 1965. The evoked vocal response of the bullfrog. Res. Mono. No. 33, M. I. T. Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  5. Capranica, R. R. 1966. Vocal response of the bullfrog to natural and synthetic mating calls. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 40:1131–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Capranica, R. R. 1968. The vocal repertoire of the bullfrog Rana catesbeiana. Behaviour 31:302–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Capranica, R. R. 1972. Acoustic and behavioral assessment of sound. IN: F. G. Worden and R. Galambos (eds.), Auditory processing of biologically significant sounds. Neurosci. Res. Prog. Bull. 10:16–17, 65–66.Google Scholar
  8. Capranica, R. R., L. S. Frishkopf and E. Nevo. 1973. Encoding of geographic dialects in the auditory system of the cricket frog. Science 182:1272–1275.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cochran, D. M. 1961. Living amphibians of the world. Doubleday and Co., Garden City, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Feng, A. S., P. M. Narins and R. R. Capranica. 1975. Three populations of primary auditory fibers in the bullfrog Rana catesbeiana: Their peripheral origins and frequency sensitivities. J. Comp. Physiol. 100:221–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frishkopf, L. S., and M. H. Goldstein, Jr. 1963. Responses to acoustic stimuli from single units in the eighth nerve of the bullfrog. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 35:1219–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gerhardt, H. C. 1973. Reproductive interactions between Hyla crucifer and Pseudacris ornata (Anura: Hylidae). Am. Midl. Natur. 89: 81–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gerhardt, H. C. 1975. Sound pressure levels and radiation patterns of the vocalizations of some North American frogs and toads. J. Comp. Physiol. 102:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Littlejohn, M. J., and T. C. Michaud. 1959. Mating call discrimination by females of Strecker’s chorus frog Pseudacris streckeri. Texas J. Sci. 11:86–92.Google Scholar
  15. Liu, C. C. 1935. Types of vocal sac in the Salientia. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. 41:19–40.Google Scholar
  16. Loftus-Hills, J. J., and M. J. Littlejohn. 1971. Mating-call sound intensities of anuran amphibians. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49:1327–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin, W. F. 1971. Mechanics of sound production in toads of the genus Bufo: passive elements. J. Exp. Zool. 176:273–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Narins, P. M., and R. R. Capranica. 1976. Sexual difference in the auditory system of the treefrog Eleutherodactylus coqui. Science 192:378–380.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Narins, P. M., and R. R. Capranica. 1977. An automated technique for analysis of temporal features in animal vocalizations. Anim. Behav. (in press).Google Scholar
  20. Nevo, E. 1969. Discussion on the systematic significance of isolating mechanisms. IN: Systematic Biology. Proc. Interco. Conf., Nat. Acad. Sci., Washington, D. C., pp. 485–489.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert R. Capranica
    • 1
  1. 1.Section of Neurobiology and Behavior and School of Electrical EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations