Translator Disclaimer
1 December 2007 Song Structure and Repertoire Sharing in the Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris in Poland
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

The present study characterizes the song of Tawny Pipit males (n = 55) recorded in May 2005 in the Wielkopolska region of Poland. Tawny Pipits sang with a very variable rate of 4–28 songs per minute (mean ± SE 16.0 ± 1.35). Songs were thus short, with an average duration of under 0.5 sec. At the same time, songs were relatively complex in structure and consisted of 2–3 (max. 5) units of frequency between 2.7 and 5.3 kHz. Based on visual inspection of sonograms and further cross-correlation analysis, 20 different song types were distinguished. Each male had only a single song type in his repertoire and the rendition of strophes produced by a male were very stereotypical. The songs of different males exhibited varying levels of similarity, from completely different, through sharing some within-song units, to strongly similar on sonograms. However, even the strongly similar songs of different males demonstrated some individuality in frequency parameters or fine note structure. On average, there were only 0.38 different song types per male within the population studied, and 83% of males sang song types shared with at least one other male. Nine of the 20 song types described were unique, i.e. sung by single males. The results of this study suggest that a highly variable song rate may be a signal of male motivation, whereas individual differences in song structure probably enable individual recognition.

REFERENCES

1.

P. Alström , K. Mild 2003. Pipits and wagtails of Europe, Asia and North America. Helm, London. Google Scholar

2.

M. C. Baker , M. S. A. Baker , L. M. Tilghman 2006. Differing effects of isolation on evolution of bird songs examples from an island-mainland comparison of three species. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 89: 331–342. Google Scholar

3.

M. D. Beecher , S. E. Campbell , J. M. Burt , C. E. Hill , J. C. Nordby 2000. Song-type matching between neighbouring song sparrows. Anim. Behav. 59: 21–27. Google Scholar

4.

H-H. Bergmann , H.-W. Helb 1982. [Voices of European Birds], BLV Verlagsgesellschaft, München. Google Scholar

5.

J. W. Bradbury , S. L. Vehrencamp 1998. Principles of Animal Communication. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts. Google Scholar

6.

E. A. Brenowitz , M. D. Beecher 2005. Song learning in birds: diversity and plasticity, opportunities and challenges. Trends Neurosci. 28: 127–132. Google Scholar

7.

C. K. Catchpole , P. J. B. Slater 1995. Bird Song. Biological themes and variations. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar

8.

S. Cramp (ed.). 1988. The Birds of Western Palearctic. Vol. V. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. Google Scholar

9.

T. I. Draganoiu 2002. Directional female preference for an exaggerated trait in canary (Serinus canaria) song. P. Roy. Soc. London B 269: 2525–2531. Google Scholar

10.

H. Fandiňo-Mariňo , J. M. E. Vielliard 2004. Complex communication signals: the case of the Blue-black Grassquit Volatinia jacarina (Aves, Emberizidae) song. Part I — A structural analysis. Ann. Brazilian Acad. Sci. 76: 325–334. Google Scholar

11.

D. Gil , M. Gahr 2002. The honesty of bird song: multiple constraints for multiple traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17: 133– 141. Google Scholar

12.

J. Grzybek , I. Michalak , T. S. Osiejuk , P. Tryjanowski 2008. Densities and habitat use of the Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris in wielkopolska region (Poland). Acta Ornithol. in press. Google Scholar

13.

D. Hasselquist , S. Bensch , T. von Schantz 1996. Correlation between male song repertoire, extra-pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler. Nature 381: 229–232. Google Scholar

14.

D. E. Kroodsma , K. Wilda , V. Salas , R. Murandian 2001. Song variation among Cistohorus wrens, with a focus on the Mérida Wren. Condor 103: 855–861. Google Scholar

15.

S. Krüger 1989. Der Brachpieper. Ziemsen, Wittenberg. Google Scholar

16.

P. Laiolo , J. L. Telia 2005. Habitat fragmentation affects culture transmission: patterns of song matching in Dupont's lark. J. App. Ecol. 42:1183–1193. Google Scholar

17.

P. C. Mundinger 1982. Microgeographic and macrogeographic variation in the acquired vocalizations of birds. In: D. E. Kroodsma , E. H. Miller (eds). Acoustic communication in birds. Vol. II. Academic Press, New York, pp. 147–208. Google Scholar

18.

F. Neuschulz 1986. Zum Gesang des männlinchen un weiblichen Brachpiepers Anthus campestris. J. Ornithol. 127: 514–515. Google Scholar

19.

S. Nowicki , R. R. Capranica 1986. Bilateral syringeal interaction in vocal production of an oscine bird sound. Science 231: 1297–1299. Google Scholar

20.

T. S. Osiejuk , K. Łosak , S. Dale 2007a. Cautious response of inexperienced birds to conventional signal of stronger threat. J. Avian Biol. 38: 644–649 Google Scholar

21.

T. S. Osiejuk , K. Ratyńska , J. P. Cygan 2007b. Corn bunting (Miliaria calandra) males respond differently to alternating and overlapping playback of song. J. Ethol. 25: 159–168. Google Scholar

22.

T. S. Osiejuk , K. Ratyńska , J. P. Cygan , S. Dale 2003. Song structure and repertoire variation in ortolan bunting (Emberiza hortulana L.) from isolated Norwegian population. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 40: 3–16. Google Scholar

23.

E. Rexstad , K. P. Burnham 1991. User's Guide for Interactive Program CAPTURE. Colorado Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Google Scholar

24.

H. Slabbekoorn , T. B. Smith 2000. Does bill size polymorphism affect courtship song characteristics in the African finch Pyrenestes ostrinus? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 71: 737–753. Google Scholar

25.

P. J. B. Slater 2003. Fifty years of bird song research: a case study in animal behaviour. Anim. Behav. 65: 633–639. Google Scholar

26.

R. Specht 2002. Avisoft-SASLab Pro Sound Analysis and Synthesis Laboratory. A PC-software for MS-Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XE Berlin: Avisoft Bioacoustics, http: //www.avisoft.comGoogle Scholar

27.

J-M. Thirion , P. Lebon 2006. [Territory and daily rhythms of male Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris from the Charente-Maritime coastal population]. Alauda 74: 323–330. Google Scholar

28.

G. Voelker 2001. Morphological correlates of migratory distance and flight display in the avian genus Anthus. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 73: 425–435. Google Scholar

29.

G. C. White , K. P. Burnham , D. L. Otis , D. R. Anderson 1978. User's Manual for Program CAPTURE, Utah State Univ. Press, Logan, Utah. Google Scholar
Tomasz S. Osiejuk, Jerzy Grzybek, and Piotr Tryjanowski "Song Structure and Repertoire Sharing in the Tawny Pipit Anthus campestris in Poland," Acta Ornithologica 42(2), 157-165, (1 December 2007). https://doi.org/10.3161/068.042.0210
Received: 1 June 2007; Accepted: 1 October 2007; Published: 1 December 2007
JOURNAL ARTICLE
9 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
Back to Top