Tweet
From www.herpdigest.org
Vocal Communication Between Male Xenopus Laevis
Martha L. Tobias , , Candace Barnard, Robert O'Hagan, Sam H. Horng1, Masha
Rand2 and Darcy B. Kelley
Animal Behaviour Volume 67, Issue 2 , February 2004, Pages 353-365
Corresponding author. Correspondence and present address: M. L. Tobias, 909
Fairchild Building, MC 2430, Department of Biological Sciences, Columbia
University, New York, NY 10027, U.S.A.
1 S. H. Horng is now at Harvard University Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street,
Boston, MA 02115, U.S.A.
2 M. Rand is now at Yale University Medical School, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven,
CT 06510, U.S.A.
Abstract
This study focuses on the role of male–male vocal communication in the
reproductive repertoire of the South African clawed frog, Xenopus laevis. Six
male and two female call types were recorded from native ponds in the environs
of Cape Town, South Africa. These include all call types previously recorded in
the laboratory as well as one previously unidentified male call: chirping. The
amount of calling and the number of call types increased as the breeding season
progressed. Laboratory recordings indicated that all six male call types were
directed to males; three of these were directed to both sexes and three were
directed exclusively to males. Both female call types were directed exclusively
to males. The predominant call type, in both field and laboratory recordings,
was the male advertisement call. Sexual state affected male vocal behaviour.
Male pairs in which at least one male was sexually active (gonadotropin
injected) produced all call types, whereas pairs of uninject!
ed males rarely called. Some call types were strongly associated with a
specific behaviour and others were not. Clasped males always growled and
clasping males typically produced amplectant calls or chirps; males not engaged
in clasping most frequently advertised. The amount of advertising produced by
one male was profoundly affected by the presence of another male. Pairing two
sexually active males resulted in suppression of advertisement calling in one;
suppression was released when males were isolated after pairing. Vocal dominance
was achieved even in the absence of physical contact (clasping). We suggest that
X. laevis males gain a reproductive advantage by competing
Schönen Tag noch!
Nicolà
Vocal Communication Between Male Xenopus Laevis
Martha L. Tobias , , Candace Barnard, Robert O'Hagan, Sam H. Horng1, Masha
Rand2 and Darcy B. Kelley
Animal Behaviour Volume 67, Issue 2 , February 2004, Pages 353-365
Corresponding author. Correspondence and present address: M. L. Tobias, 909
Fairchild Building, MC 2430, Department of Biological Sciences, Columbia
University, New York, NY 10027, U.S.A.
1 S. H. Horng is now at Harvard University Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street,
Boston, MA 02115, U.S.A.
2 M. Rand is now at Yale University Medical School, 333 Cedar Street, New Haven,
CT 06510, U.S.A.
Abstract
This study focuses on the role of male–male vocal communication in the
reproductive repertoire of the South African clawed frog, Xenopus laevis. Six
male and two female call types were recorded from native ponds in the environs
of Cape Town, South Africa. These include all call types previously recorded in
the laboratory as well as one previously unidentified male call: chirping. The
amount of calling and the number of call types increased as the breeding season
progressed. Laboratory recordings indicated that all six male call types were
directed to males; three of these were directed to both sexes and three were
directed exclusively to males. Both female call types were directed exclusively
to males. The predominant call type, in both field and laboratory recordings,
was the male advertisement call. Sexual state affected male vocal behaviour.
Male pairs in which at least one male was sexually active (gonadotropin
injected) produced all call types, whereas pairs of uninject!
ed males rarely called. Some call types were strongly associated with a
specific behaviour and others were not. Clasped males always growled and
clasping males typically produced amplectant calls or chirps; males not engaged
in clasping most frequently advertised. The amount of advertising produced by
one male was profoundly affected by the presence of another male. Pairing two
sexually active males resulted in suppression of advertisement calling in one;
suppression was released when males were isolated after pairing. Vocal dominance
was achieved even in the absence of physical contact (clasping). We suggest that
X. laevis males gain a reproductive advantage by competing
Schönen Tag noch!
Nicolà
)
Kommentar