The White-faced Whistling Duck is a waterfowl species lacking any differences in ornamentation, coloration, size or behavior between the sexes. For distant communication, this species uses loud whistles. We analyzed 12 spectral parameters of 344 whistles from 23 captive adult ducks (14 males and 9 females). Discriminant analysis showed 94% correct assignment to an individual (N = 279 calls from 14 birds; 15–22 calls per bird). Separately for 8 males (162 calls) and for 6 females (117 calls), discriminant analysis showed 99% and 93% correct assignment to individuals respectively. Discriminant analysis for sex (N = 86; 3 calls from each of 14 males and 5 calls from each of 9 females) showed 100% correct assignment. Intersexual differences were governed by frequency parameters, the values of which were significantly higher in females than in males. Cluster analysis showed that differences between sexes were expressed significantly more strongly than the individual differences. The fact that the “acoustical keys” differed as regards the identification of individual birds or their sex may significantly enhance the reliability of acoustical recognition systems in the White-faced Whistling Duck. The data are discussed in the context of the biology of the White-faced Whistling Duck and significant intersexual differences in syringial and tracheal anatomy, which may be responsible for the sharp distinctions between the sexes in the calls of this species.
REFERENCES
R. Allenbacher
,
J. Bohner
,
K. Hammerschmidt
1995. Individuelle Merkmale im “krah” Ruf der Nebelkrahe. J. Ornithol. 136: 441–446. Google Scholar
T. Aubin
,
P. Jouventin
,
C. Hildenbrand
2000. Penguins use the two-voice system to recognize each other. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. 267: 1081–1087. Google Scholar
J. A. Baker
,
E. D. Bailey
1987. Auditory recognition of covey mates from separation calls in Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus). Can. J. Zool. 65: 1724–1728. Google Scholar
M. R. Ballintijn
,
C. ten Cate
1997. Sex differences in the vocalizations and syrinx of the Collared Dove (Streptopelia decaocto). Auk 114: 22–39. Google Scholar
J. W. Bradbury
,
S. L. Vehrencamp
1998. Principles of Animal Communication. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA. Google Scholar
G. Carlson
,
C. H. Trost
1992. Sex determination of the Whooping Crane by analysis of vocalizations. Condor 94: 532–536. Google Scholar
P. M. Cavanagh
,
G. Ritchison
1987. Variation in the bounce and whinny songs of the Eastern Screech-Owl. Wilson Bull. 99: 620–627. Google Scholar
I. Charrier
,
P. Jouventin
,
N. Mathevon
,
T. Aubin
2001a. Individual identity coding depends on call type in the South Polar Skua Catharacta micormicki.
Polar Biology 24: 378–382. Google Scholar
I. Charrier
,
N. Mathevon
,
P. Jouventin
,
T. Aubin
2001b. Acoustic communication in Black-headed gull colony: how do chicks identify their parents? Ethology 107: 961–974. Google Scholar
B. K. Clapperton
1987. Individual recognition by voice in the Pukeko, Porphyrie porphyrio melanotus (Aves; Rallidae). N. Z. J. Zool. 14: 11–18. Google Scholar
A. Clark
1976. Observations on the breeding of Whistling Ducks in South Africa. Ostrich 47: 59–64. Google Scholar
A. Clark
1978. Some aspects of the behaviour of Whistling Ducks in South Africa. Ostrich 49: 31–39. Google Scholar
J. B. Falls
1982. Individual recognition by sounds in birds. In:
D. E. Kroodsma
,
E. H. Miller
(eds).
Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. II. Song Learning and its Consequences. Academic Press, New York, pp. 237–278. Google Scholar
S. M. Farabaugh
1982. The ecological and social significance of duetting. In:
D. E. Kroodsma
,
E. H. Miller
(eds).
Acoustic Communication in Birds, Vol. II. Song Learning and its Consequences. Academic Press, New York, pp. 85–124. Google Scholar
C. C. Farquhar
1993. Individual and intersexual variation in alarm calls of the White-tailed Hawk. Condor 95: 234–239. Google Scholar
J.-C Guyomarc'h
,
A. Aupiais
,
C. Guyomarc'h
1998. Individual differences in the long-distance vocalizations used during pair bonding in European Quail (Coturnix coturnix). Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 10: 333–346. Google Scholar
M. Hausberger
,
J. M. Black
,
J. P. Richard
1991. Bill opening and sound spectrum in Barnacle Goose calls: individuals with “wide mouths” have higher pitched voices. Anim. Behav. 41: 319–322. Google Scholar
P. A. Johnsgard
1961. Tracheal anatomy of the Anatidae and its taxonomic significance. Wildfowl Trust 12th Annual Report: 58–69. Google Scholar
P. A. Johnsgard
1965. Handbook of Waterfowl Behaviour. Constable & Co., Ltd., London. Google Scholar
P. A. Johnsgard
1971. Observations on sound production in the Anatidae. Wildfowl 22: 46–59. Google Scholar
I. L. Jones
,
J. B. Falls
,
A. J. Gaston
1987. Vocal recognition between parents and young of Ancient Murrelets, Synthliboramphus antiquus (Aves: Aicidae). Anim. Behav. 35: 1405–1415. Google Scholar
P. Jouventin
,
T. Aubin
,
T. Lengagne
1999. Finding a parent in a King Penguin colony: the acoustic system of individual recognition. Anim. Behav. 57: 1175–1183. Google Scholar
T. Lengagne
,
J. Lauga
,
T. Aubin
2001. Intra-syllabic acoustic signatures used by the King Penguin in parent-chick recognition: An experimental approach. J. Exp. Biol. 204: 663–672. Google Scholar
B. C. Livezey
1995. A phylogenetic analysis of the Whistling and White-backed Ducks (Anatidae, Dendrocygninae) using morphological characters. Annals of Carnegie Museum 64: 65–97. Google Scholar
N. Mathevon
1996. What parameters can be used for individual acoustic recognition by the Greater Flamingo? C. R. Acad. Sci., Ser. 3. 319: 29–32. Google Scholar
L. May
1998. Individually distinctive Corncrake Crex crex calls: a further study. Bioacoustics 9: 135–148. Google Scholar
C. Noel
,
C. Keulen
1997. Vocalisations du Grebe huppe (Podiceps cristatus L.). Contexte comportemental et variabilite. Cahiers d'Ethologie 17: 1–18. Google Scholar
G. L. Nuechterlein
,
D. Buitron
1992. Vocal advertising and sex recognition in Eared grebes. Condor 94: 937–943. Google Scholar
S. A. Petrie
,
V. Petrie
1998. Activity budget of White-faced Whistling Ducks during winter and spring in northern Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa. J. Wildl. Manage. 62: 1119–1126. Google Scholar
S. A. Petrie
,
K.H. Rogers
1997a. Ecology, Nutrient Reserve Dynamics and Movements of White-faced Ducks in South Africa. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria. Google Scholar
S. A. Petrie
,
K.H. Rogers
1997b. Activity budget of breeding White-faced Whistling Ducks Dendrocygna viduata on stock-ponds in semi-arid South Africa, and a comparison with north-temperate waterfowl. South African J. Wildl. Res. 27: 79–85. Google Scholar
W. Schwanke
,
E. Rutschke
1988. Zur akustischen Kommunikation der Graugans (Anser anser L.) unter dem Aspekt des individueller Erkennens. Beitr. Vogelkd. 34: 101–110. Google Scholar
M. Taoka
,
T. Sato
,
T. Kamada
,
H. Okumura
1989. Sexual dimorphism of chatter-calls and vocal sex recognition in Leach's storm-petrels (Oceanodroma leucorhoa). Auk 106: 498-501. Google Scholar
C. ten Cate
1992. Coo types in the Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto: one theme, distinctive variations. Bioacoustics 4: 161–183. Google Scholar
E. V. Volodina
,
I. A. Volodin
2003. [Vocal repertoire and individual variability in calls Fulvous whistling duck]. Casarka 9: 67–77. Google Scholar
W. Wickler
1976. Duetting song in birds: Biological significance of stationary and nonstationary processes. J. Theor. Biol. 61: 493–97. Google Scholar
W. Wickler
,
U. Seibt
1982. Song splitting in the evolution of duetting. Z. Tierpsychol. 59: 127–140. Google Scholar
