Cicadas impact bird communication in a noisy tropical rainforest (2024)

Article Navigation

Volume 26 Issue 3 May-June 2015

Article Contents

  • Abstract

  • INTRODUCTION

  • METHODS

  • RESULTS

  • DISCUSSION

  • SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

  • FUNDING

  • REFERENCES

  • < Previous
  • Next >

Journal Article

,

Patrick J. Hart

a

Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Hilo

,

200W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720

,

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Robert Hall

b

Department of Biology, University of Washington, 24 Kincaid Hall, Seattle WA 98105

, and

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

William Ray

a

Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Hilo

,

200W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720

,

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

,

Angela Beck

a

Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Hilo

,

200W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720

,

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

James Zook

c

Union de Ornitologos, Apdo 182–4200, Naranjo de Alajuela, Costa Rica

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

Handling editor: Bob Wong

Author Notes

Behavioral Ecology, Volume 26, Issue 3, May-June 2015, Pages 839–842, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv018

Published:

03 April 2015

  • PDF
  • Split View
  • Views
    • Article contents
    • Figures & tables
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Supplementary Data
  • Cite

    Cite

    Patrick J. Hart, Robert Hall, William Ray, Angela Beck, James Zook, Cicadas impact bird communication in a noisy tropical rainforest, Behavioral Ecology, Volume 26, Issue 3, May-June 2015, Pages 839–842, https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv018

    Close

Search

Close

Search

Advanced Search

Search Menu

Abstract

Many animals communicate through acoustic signaling, and “acoustic space” may be viewed as a limited resource that organisms compete for. If acoustic signals overlap, the information in them is masked, so there should be selection toward strategies that reduce signal overlap. The extent to which animals are able to partition acoustic space in acoustically diverse habitats such as tropical forests is poorly known. Here, we demonstrate that a single cicada species plays a major role in the frequency and timing of acoustic communication in a neotropical wet forest bird community. Using an automated acoustic monitor, we found that cicadas vary the timing of their signals throughout the day and that the frequency range and timing of bird vocalizations closely track these signals. Birds significantly avoid temporal overlap with cicadas by reducing and often shutting down vocalizations at the onset of cicada signals that utilize the same frequency range. When birds do vocalize at the same time as cicadas, the vocalizations primarily occur at nonoverlapping frequencies with cicada signals. Our results greatly improve our understanding of the community dynamics of acoustic signaling and reveal how patterns in biotic noise shape the frequency and timing of bird vocalizations in tropical forests.

INTRODUCTION

Acoustic signaling is the primary form of communication for many terrestrial organisms, especially birds, mammals, frogs, and insects (Rogers and Kaplan 2000; Gerhardt and Huber 2002). Acoustic space is shared by all animals in a community but can only be partitioned in 2 primary dimensions (spectral and temporal; Nelson and Marler 1990; Planque and Slabbekoorn 2008). When acoustic signals produced by different individuals overlap, interference may occur and the information in each signal may be masked (Dooling 1982; Brumm and Slabbekoorn 2005).

Because acoustic communication consumes time and energy (Prestwich 1994; Oberweger and Goller 2001), individuals should maximize the efficiency of signal transmission to receivers by reducing interference and masking from other animal signals, as well as from abiotic background noise such as wind and flowing water (Klump 1996). Interference with other animal signals and background noise may be reduced by altering the timing and/or spectral frequency of a signal, by increasing signal rate (Lengagne et al. 1999), and by increasing signal amplitude, also known as the Lombard effect (Lombard 1911; Brumm et al. 2004).

Tropical rainforests are among the most biologically and acoustically diverse places on earth (Planque and Slabbekoorn 2008) so there is great potential for competition for acoustic space in this environment. The extent to which animals are able to partition acoustic space and thus avoid signal interference in these habitats, however, is poorly known. During daylight hours, birds and insects dominate acoustic space in many neotropical rainforests, and there is evidence from these forests that some birds species do time their signals to reduce overlap with other bird species (Luther 2009). Some of the most notable sounds in neotropical forests are often produced by cicadas (Hemiptera; Cicadidae). Cicadas are present year-round in many tropical forests and are among the loudest calling insects known, with sound pressure levels greater than 100 dB at a distance of 50cm for some species (Sanborn and Phillips 1995). Communities of cicadas that call simultaneously have been shown to partition acoustic space (Sueur 2002), however, the effect of these cicada signals on bird communication at the community level has not been described. In this study, we address the hypothesis that birds compete with cicadas for acoustic space, and that acoustic partitioning occurs whereby birds avoid interference with cicada signals. We do this by examining the effects of the mating signal of a single cicada species on an entire community of birds in a Costa Rican rainforest. In particular, we test the prediction that there is a reduction both in the number of bird species that vocalize and in the overall rate of bird vocalizations in the forest (for all species combined) after cicadas begin signaling each day. Also, we address whether birds avoid spectral frequencies (bandwidths) used by cicadas following the onset of cicada signaling.

METHODS

This study was conducted in primary and secondary wet forest at approximately 1100-m elevation at the Organization for Tropical Studies Las Cruces Biological field station in southern Costa Rica. We deployed an automated acoustic recorder (Songmeter SM2; Wildlife Acoustics Inc.) about 1 m above the ground in 7 different locations separated by at least 200 m. We programmed the Songmeter to record for 5min at 5-min intervals throughout the day and night from 24 June to 10 July, 2012. These months fall within the “wet” season in this forest, however, all recordings were made between 06:10 and 11:30 during sunny or partly cloudy conditions (rainfall generally began at approximately 13:00 each day) with temperatures ranging from 18 to 25 °C. Recordings were made in .WAV file format at a sampling rate of 44.1kHz using a single omnidirectional microphone (SMX-II: Wildlife Acoustics) with a sensitivity of −35 dBV/pa and frequency response of 20–20000 Hz.

Zammara smaragdina is a large-bodied cicada species that generally begins signaling in choruses by mid-morning. For each of 7 days at 7 different locations, we identified the time at which Zammara began calling and examined spectrograms of the three 5-min recording files made immediately before and after chorus onset (30min total). Zammara choruses generally occurred as a pulsing broadband signal throughout each of the 3 latter recordings. For all 6 recording files, we identified, tallied the number of occurrences, and measured the spectral and temporal characteristics of each bird vocalization using cursor placement in spectrograms using Raven Pro 1.4 software (Bioacoustics Research Program 2011).

Spectrograms of vocalizations were judged to be “unique” (for example, the call of the White-breasted Wood wren) based on consensus of 4 researchers (PH, RH, WR, and AB), with questionable vocalizations verified by JZ. Species identity for each vocalization was determined based on field experience by PH and especially JZ, with additional assistance from an audio CD of the bird songs of Las Cruces (Harris and Reid 2007).

All bird and cicada signals were measured using a Hann window type with a window size of 23.2ms, window overlap of 50%, and DFT (discrete Fourier transform) size of 1024 samples (Charif et al. 2010). Because each unique bird signal that was detected was recorded multiple times, and because signal characteristics can vary somewhat due to the distance of the sender from the recorder, we calculated a mean minimum and maximum frequency for each unique bird signal and for all Zammara choruses recorded. The difference between the mean minimum and maximum frequencies defined the mean frequency range for each signal. The spectral relationship (overlap) between bird and cicada signals was then categorized into 3 levels. A bird vocalization that shared 100% of its mean frequency range with the mean frequency range of a Zammara signal was considered a “complete” overlap; less than 100% to near zero was categorized as “partial,” and all others were categorized as “none.”

For the “partial” and “none” overlap categories, one-sample t-tests (R Core Development Team, version 3.0.1, 2013) were used to compare (1) the number of bird species vocalizing before versus after cicadas began signaling and (2) the total number of vocalizations before versus after cicadas began signaling. Species with vocalizations in the “complete” overlap category were not compared due to the possibility of under-counting vocalizations in this category following the onset of cicada signaling. As a control, we compared the number of vocalizations in the first three 5-min recording files to the last 3 of a 6 recording file sequence recorded on 5 mornings at 5 different locations during the study period in which Zammara choruses did not occur. The start times chosen for these sequences corresponded to the time of onset of Zammara choruses for the previous day. Little is known about the seasonality of Zammara choruses, however, this cicada species appears to call more regularly in the January to May dry season at Las Cruces. It is possible that this study coincided with the end of the Zammara chorus season, which could explain why they did not chorus each day.

We used chi-square tests in R (R Core Development Team, version 3.0.1, 2013) to determine whether the observed number of bird vocalizations that partially overlapped with cicada signals for the 3 files per day recorded just after cicadas began signaling was different than expected, based on the number of bird vocalizations that overlapped with the mean frequency range of cicada signals for the 3 files per day recorded just before cicadas began signaling.

RESULTS

We identified 62 bird species that produced a total of 72 unique vocalizations, based on spectrogram characteristics. We were not able to assign a species name to an additional 20 unique signals, most of which were single note calls detected less than 5 times (Supplementary Appendix 1). About 17 unique signals were categorized as “complete overlap” and excluded from all subsequent analyses. The spectral bandwidth shared by birds and insects in this study was relatively narrow; 78.3% of the bird vocalizations we recorded occurred entirely within 1–8kHz. Similarly, the 95% CI for signals produced by Zammara cicadas ranged from a low of 2.70±0.05 to a mean high of 6.56±0.12kHz (n = 21 recording files). Variability in the minimum and maximum frequency of these signals was likely due primarily to distance of signaling individuals from the recorder.

Evidence for acoustic partitioning

Birds vocalized with little interference from other animal taxa for the first 2–3h after dawn. Zammara usually produced the first significant nonavian signals each day, with start-times ranging from 08:40 to 10:40 (Table 1). The dense broadband structure of these cicada signals would likely mask most of the more finely structured signals of birds (Figure 1a and b ; Supplementary Movie File 1a and b). However, birds in this forest appear to significantly avoid temporal overlap with cicadas by reducing and often shutting down vocalizations at the onset of cicada signal bands that utilize the same frequency range. The mean number of bird species vocalizing during a 15-min period (including unique unidentified vocalizations) immediately prior to the onset of Zammara signals each day was 15.7 and dropped significantly to 6.0 after the onset of Zammara signals (one-sample t = 4.01, df = 6, P = 0.007; Table 1). There was a similar decrease in the total number of vocalizations (for all bird species combined) produced immediately before versus after the onset of cicada signaling. The mean number of vocalizations per 15-min period dropped significantly from 435.5 to 196.1 (one-sample T = 6.50, df = 6, P = 0.0006; Table 1). For the 5 control days during which no Zammara signaled, there was no difference in the number of vocalizations between the first and second 15-min periods (mean = 450.6 vs. 506.0; one-sample t = −1.29, df = 4, P = 0.26). When birds did vocalize at the same time as cicadas (temporal overlap), they primarily did so at nonoverlapping frequencies. There were 42 partial overlaps and 23 no overlaps of unique bird signals with the mean cicada frequency range before cicadas began signaling, versus only 5 partial overlaps and 28 no overlaps after, a significant drop in number of overlapping vocalizations after cicadas began signaling (χ2 = 19.52, df = 1, P < 0.00001; Figure 2).

Table 1

The total number of bird species and vocalizations, excluding “complete” overlap, recorded in three 5-min tracks before and after the onset of cicada choruses for each day in 2012

DateCicada chorus start timeNumber of bird species beforeNumber of bird species afterTotal vocalizations beforeTotal vocalizations after
June 2409:501711961777
June 2808:50128391117
July 110:40184431131
July 209:20116496221
July 608:4024519953
July 709:4010613325
July 1010:1018243849
DateCicada chorus start timeNumber of bird species beforeNumber of bird species afterTotal vocalizations beforeTotal vocalizations after
June 2409:501711961777
June 2808:50128391117
July 110:40184431131
July 209:20116496221
July 608:4024519953
July 709:4010613325
July 1010:1018243849

Open in new tab

Table 1

The total number of bird species and vocalizations, excluding “complete” overlap, recorded in three 5-min tracks before and after the onset of cicada choruses for each day in 2012

DateCicada chorus start timeNumber of bird species beforeNumber of bird species afterTotal vocalizations beforeTotal vocalizations after
June 2409:501711961777
June 2808:50128391117
July 110:40184431131
July 209:20116496221
July 608:4024519953
July 709:4010613325
July 1010:1018243849
DateCicada chorus start timeNumber of bird species beforeNumber of bird species afterTotal vocalizations beforeTotal vocalizations after
June 2409:501711961777
June 2808:50128391117
July 110:40184431131
July 209:20116496221
July 608:4024519953
July 709:4010613325
July 1010:1018243849

Open in new tab

Figure 1

Cicadas impact bird communication in a noisy tropical rainforest (3)

Open in new tabDownload slide

A comparison of the “soundscape” recorded during two 30 s periods from the same location on 6 July 2012, within secondary wet forest at Las Cruces Biological Station, Costa Rica. (a) A spectrogram from approximately 08:14 AM, before the onset of Zammara cicada choruses and shows 7 unique vocalizations (Arremon aurantiirostris call, Picumnus olivaceus, Arremon torquatus, Catharus aurantiirostris, Arremon aurantiirostris song, Phaeothlypis fulvicauda, Formicarius analis). (b) A spectrogram from approximately 08:50 AM, just after onset of Zammara cicada choruses, which can be seen by the dark, pulsing signal with a base frequency occupying much of the bandwidth between approximately 2.7 and 6.5 kHz. No birds are vocalizing during this period.

Figure 2

Cicadas impact bird communication in a noisy tropical rainforest (4)

Open in new tabDownload slide

Rate of overlap, excluding “complete” overlap, between bird and cicada signals before versus after the onset of cicada signaling for 7 recording days during June and July 2012 in secondary wet forest at Las Cruces Biological Station, Costa Rica. The “overlap before” bar represents the number of unique bird vocalizations produced prior to the onset of Zammara chorusing, with spectra that overlap to any degree with the normal base frequency range of Zammara signals. The “overlap after” bar represents the number of unique bird vocalizations with spectra that overlapped to any degree with the actual Zammara signals.

DISCUSSION

Past work has shown that birds are able to adjust both the timing and frequency of their signals to reduce overlap with the signals of other bird species (Cody and Brown 1969; Ficken et al. 1974; Brumm and Slabbekoorn 2005; Brumm 2006). They may also adjust the frequency of signals in response to abiotic noise (Narins et al. 2004), biotic noise (Kirschel et al. 2009), and urban noise (Slabbekoorn and Peet 2003; Patricelli and Blickley 2006). This study demonstrates a significant effect of arthropod signals on communication for an entire community of birds. Cicada signaling appears to affect the number of species vocalizing, as well as the overall rate and frequency range of bird vocalizations in this forest. Most birds significantly avoided temporal overlap with cicadas by reducing and often shutting down vocalizations at the onset of cicada signals that utilize the same frequency range. Most birds also avoided spectral overlap with cicadas by vocalizing at frequencies that did not overlap with the much higher amplitude cicada signals. In general, only those species whose vocalizations do not overlap with Zammara continue to vocalize after the onset of Zammara signals.

Why do birds sing at particular frequencies and concentrate their songs at particular times of the day (often early morning)? Under the acoustic adaptation hypothesis (Morton 1975), the physical environment plays a major role in determining the most effective frequencies for sound transmission by vocalizing birds, with forest habitats favoring lower frequencies. In dense tropical wet forests, Henwood and Fabrick (1979) and Ellinger and Hödl (2003) demonstrated that physical conditions which affect sound propagation, including temperature, humidity, and wind-speed, are generally best early in the day, which at least partially explains why birds are most vocal during the morning hours. This study reveals how biotic noise in the form of cicada choruses is a factor that likely shapes the frequency and timing of bird vocalizations in tropical forests and provides an additional explanation for why birds are most vocal early in the day.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

Supplementary material can be found at Supplementary Data

FUNDING

Financial support was provided through an NSF LSAMP award to E. Losos (0902105) and through an NSF CREST award (0833211) to D. Price, P. Hart, E. Stacy, and M. Takabayashi.

We thank the Organization for Tropical Studies (OTS) NAPIRE (Native American and Pacific Islanders Research Experience) program and the staff of the OTS Las Cruces Biological Field station, particularly Zak Zahawi, and Michael Atencio-Picado.

REFERENCES

Brumm

H

.

2006

.

Signalling through acoustic windows: nightingales avoid interspecific competition by short-term adjustment of song timing

.

J Comp Physiol A

.

192

(

12

):

1279

1285

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Brumm

H

Voss

K

Köllmer

I

Todt

D

.

2004

.

Acoustic communication in noise: regulation of call characteristics in a New World monkey

.

J Exp Biol

.

207

:

443

448

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Charif

RA

Waack

AM

Strickman

LM

.

2010

.

Raven Pro User’s Manual

.

Ithaca (New York)

:

Cornell Lab of Ornithology

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Cody

ML

Brown

JH

.

1969

.

Song asynchrony in neighbouring bird species

.

Nature

.

222

:

778

780

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Dooling

RJ

.

1982

.

Auditory perception in birds

. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors.

Acoustic communication in birds

. New York: Academic Press. Vol.

1

. p.

95

130

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Ellinger

N

Hödl

W

.

2003

.

Habitat acoustics of a Neotropical lowland rainforest

.

Bioacoustics

.

13

(

3

):

297

321

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Ficken

RW

Ficken

MS

Hailman

JP

.

1974

.

Temporal pattern shifts to avoid acoustic interference in singing birds

.

Science

.

183

:

762

763

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Gerhardt

HC

Huber

F

.

2002

.

Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions

.

Chicago (IL)

:

University of Chicago Press

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Harris

JBC

Reid

L

.

2007

.

Bird Songs of Las Cruces

,

Costa Rica

.

Audio CD

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Henwood

K

Fabrick

A

.

1979

.

A quantitative analysis of the dawn chorus: temporal selection for community optimization

.

The American Naturalist

.

114

(

2

):

260

274

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Kirschel

AN

Blumstein

DT

Cohen

RE

Buermann

W

Smith

TB

Slabbekoorn

H

.

2009

.

Birdsong tuned to the environment: green hylia song varies with elevation, tree cover, and noise

.

Behav Ecol

.

20

(

5

):

1089

1095

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Klump

G

.

1996

.

Bird communication in the noisy world

. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors.

Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds

. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press. p.

321

338

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Lengagne

T

Jouventin

P

Aubin

T

.

1999

.

Finding one’s mate in a king penguin colony: efficiency of acoustic communication

.

Behaviour

.

136

(

7

):

833

846

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Lombard

E

.

1911

.

Le signe de l’elevation de la voix

.

Ann Maladies Oreille, Larynx, Nez, Pharynx

.

37

(

101–119

):

25

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Luther

D

.

2009

.

The influence of the acoustic community on songs of birds in a neotropical rain forest

.

Behav Ecol

.

20

(

4

):

864

871

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Morton

ES

.

1975

.

Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds

.

Am Nat

.

109

(

965

):

17

34

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Narins

P

Feng

AS

Lin

W

Schnitzler

HU

Denzinger

A

Suthers

RA

Xu

C

.

2004

.

Old World frog and bird vocalizations contain prominent ultrasonic harmonics

.

J Acoust Soc Am

.

115

:

910

913

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Nelson

DA

Marler

P

.

1990

.

The perception of birdsong and the ecological concept of signal space. In: Stebbins WC, Berkley MA, editors. Comparative Perception, Volume II: Complex Signals

.

John Wiley & Sons

,

New York

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Oberweger

K

Goller

F

.

2001

.

The metabolic cost of birdsong production

.

J Exp Biol

.

204

:

3379

3388

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Patricelli

GL

Blickley

JL

.

2006

.

Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment

.

Auk

.

123

(

3

):

639

649

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Planque

R

Slabbekoorn

H

.

2008

.

Spectral overlap in songs and temporal avoidance in a Peruvian bird assemblage

.

Ethology

.

114

(

3

):

262

271

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Prestwich

K

.

1994

.

The energetics of acoustic signaling in anurans and insects

.

Am Zool

.

34

(

6

):

625

643

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Rogers

LJ

Kaplan

GT

.

2000

.

Songs, roars, and rituals: Communication in birds, mammals, and other animals

. USA:

Harvard University Press

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Sanborn

AF

Phillips

PK

.

1995

.

Scaling of sound pressure level and body size in cicadas (hom*optera: Cicadidae; Tibicinidae)

.

Ann Entomol Soc Am

.

88

(

4

):

479

484

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Slabbekoorn

H

Peet

M

.

2003

.

Ecology: Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise

.

Nature

.

424

(

6946

):

267

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Sueur

J

.

2002

.

Cicada acoustic communication: potential sound partitioning in a multispecies community from Mexico (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadidae)

.

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

.

75

(

3

):

379

394

.

Google Scholar

OpenURL Placeholder Text

Author notes

Handling editor: Bob Wong

© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Issue Section:

Original Article

Download all slides

  • Supplementary data

  • Supplementary data

    Advertisem*nt

    Citations

    Views

    6,409

    Altmetric

    More metrics information

    Metrics

    Total Views 6,409

    3,769 Pageviews

    2,640 PDF Downloads

    Since 10/1/2016

    Month: Total Views:
    October 2016 1
    November 2016 2
    December 2016 3
    January 2017 2
    February 2017 16
    March 2017 17
    April 2017 20
    May 2017 8
    June 2017 7
    July 2017 4
    August 2017 7
    September 2017 9
    October 2017 19
    November 2017 11
    December 2017 130
    January 2018 105
    February 2018 126
    March 2018 187
    April 2018 143
    May 2018 127
    June 2018 93
    July 2018 75
    August 2018 58
    September 2018 63
    October 2018 77
    November 2018 149
    December 2018 108
    January 2019 102
    February 2019 156
    March 2019 164
    April 2019 160
    May 2019 99
    June 2019 60
    July 2019 84
    August 2019 136
    September 2019 171
    October 2019 116
    November 2019 55
    December 2019 50
    January 2020 35
    February 2020 41
    March 2020 49
    April 2020 28
    May 2020 24
    June 2020 64
    July 2020 53
    August 2020 79
    September 2020 60
    October 2020 98
    November 2020 79
    December 2020 59
    January 2021 60
    February 2021 53
    March 2021 97
    April 2021 112
    May 2021 110
    June 2021 123
    July 2021 44
    August 2021 42
    September 2021 77
    October 2021 57
    November 2021 45
    December 2021 66
    January 2022 64
    February 2022 93
    March 2022 53
    April 2022 61
    May 2022 101
    June 2022 63
    July 2022 52
    August 2022 42
    September 2022 107
    October 2022 69
    November 2022 74
    December 2022 57
    January 2023 51
    February 2023 51
    March 2023 84
    April 2023 80
    May 2023 74
    June 2023 63
    July 2023 180
    August 2023 67
    September 2023 68
    October 2023 90
    November 2023 61
    December 2023 69
    January 2024 91
    February 2024 69

    Citations

    Powered by Dimensions

    46 Web of Science

    Altmetrics

    ×

    Email alerts

    Article activity alert

    Advance article alerts

    New issue alert

    In progress issue alert

    Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic

    Citing articles via

    Google Scholar

    • Latest

    • Most Read

    • Most Cited

    No geographical differences in male mate choice in a widespread fish, Limia perugiae
    Parental overproduction allows siblicidal bird to adjust brood size to climate-driven prey variation
    Sensory trap leads to reliable communication without a shift in nonsexual responses to the model cue
    Inter- and intraspecific female behavioral plasticity drive temporal niche segregation in two Tribolium species
    Movement or plasticity: acoustic responses of a torrent frog to stream geophony

    More from Oxford Academic

    Animal Behaviour and Behavioural Ecology

    Biological Sciences

    Science and Mathematics

    Zoology and Animal Sciences

    Books

    Journals

    Advertisem*nt

    Cicadas impact bird communication in a noisy tropical rainforest (2024)
    Top Articles
    Latest Posts
    Article information

    Author: Geoffrey Lueilwitz

    Last Updated:

    Views: 5973

    Rating: 5 / 5 (80 voted)

    Reviews: 87% of readers found this page helpful

    Author information

    Name: Geoffrey Lueilwitz

    Birthday: 1997-03-23

    Address: 74183 Thomas Course, Port Micheal, OK 55446-1529

    Phone: +13408645881558

    Job: Global Representative

    Hobby: Sailing, Vehicle restoration, Rowing, Ghost hunting, Scrapbooking, Rugby, Board sports

    Introduction: My name is Geoffrey Lueilwitz, I am a zealous, encouraging, sparkling, enchanting, graceful, faithful, nice person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.