Phylogenetic Influence on Mating Call Preferences in Female Túngara Frogs, Physalaemus Pustulosus
Overview
Affiliations
We evaluated how various phylogenetic models for estimating ancestral characters can influence studies of behavioural evolution. Previously we used a single model of evolution to estimate the values of call characters at ancestral nodes for the Physalaemus pustulosus species group and some close relatives (Ryan & Rand 1995, Science, 269, 390-392). We then synthesized these ancestral calls and measured the females' responses to such calls in phonotaxis experiments. We repeated the above procedure to determine the sensitivity of these results and conclusions to various models used to estimate the ancestral call characters. We asked whether: (1) different models gave different call estimates for the same nodes; (2) different call estimates at the same node were perceived as different by females; and (3) differences in female responses influenced previous conclusions. We used seven different models that varied in at least one of the following parameters: tree topology (bifurcating versus pectinate in-group trees), algorithms (local squared-change versus squared-change parsimony), tempo (gradual or punctuated evolution), and outgroups (two or three outgroup taxa used). Although different models often gave different call estimates for the same node, these different estimates often were not perceived as different by the females. These data reinforce our previous conclusions that: (1) the range of female preferences exceeds the known variation of the conspecific call; (2) females do not discriminate between the conspecific call and the call of their most recent ancestor; and (3) female responses may be context dependent, given that females differ in their responses to the same signal variation in discrimination and recognition experiments. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
Avey M, Bloomfield L, Elie J, Freeberg T, Guillette L, Hoeschele M PLoS One. 2014; 9(6):e100927.
PMID: 24963707 PMC: 4071011. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100927.
Relative comparisons of call parameters enable auditory grouping in frogs.
Farris H, Ryan M Nat Commun. 2011; 2:410.
PMID: 21811239 PMC: 10035542. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1417.
Chakraborty M, Mangiamele L, Burmeister S PLoS One. 2010; 5(9):e12898.
PMID: 20877560 PMC: 2943914. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012898.
Task differences confound sex differences in receiver permissiveness in túngara frogs.
Bernal X, Rand A, Ryan M Proc Biol Sci. 2009; 276(1660):1323-9.
PMID: 19141428 PMC: 2660951. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2008.0935.
Vestigial preference functions in neural networks and túngara frogs.
Phelps S, Ryan M, Rand A Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001; 98(23):13161-6.
PMID: 11698682 PMC: 60841. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.231296998.