Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bioacoustic distances between the begging calls of brood parasites and their host species: a comparison of metrics and techniques

  • Methods
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A variety of bioacoustics distance metrics have been used to assess similarities in the vocalizations of different individuals. Here, we provide a detailed analysis of several acoustic similarity indices, some of which have been developed with the specific aim of characterizing the sensory coding of auditory stimuli. We compare different approaches through the analysis of begging calls of several passerine species and specialist brood parasitic cuckoos that putatively evolved to mimic their hosts. The different bioacoustics distances did not provide consistently correlated similarity patterns, implying that they are sensitive to different sound features. However, the encoded spectrogram alignment method was correlated with all other acoustic distance metrics, suggesting that this method provides a consistent approach to use when the perceptually salient sound parameters are unknown for a particular species. Our analyses confirm that statistical similarity of begging calls can be detected in a New Zealand pair of host and specialist parasite species. We also show detectable similarity in two other Australasian host–parasite pairs and another New Zealand system, but to a more limited extent. By examining phylogenetic patterns in the begging call diversity, we also confirm that specialist cuckoos have evolved to mimic the begging calls of their hosts but host species have not co-evolved to modify their calls in response to begging call similarity by the parasite. Our results illustrate that understanding the function and mechanism of behavioral copying and mimicry requires statistically consistent measures of similarity that are related to both the physical aspects of the particular display and the sensory basis of its perception.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson MG, Hauber ME (2007) A recognition-free mechanism for reliable rejection of brood parasites. Trends Ecol Evol 22(6):283–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MG, Moskát C, Bán M, Grim T, Cassey P, Hauber ME (2009a) Egg eviction imposes a recoverable cost of virulence in chicks of a brood parasite. PLoS One 4(11):e7725

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson MG, Ross HA, Brunton DH, Hauber ME (2009b) Begging call matching between a specialist brood parasite and its host: a comparative approach to detect coevolution. Biol J Linn Soc 98:208–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker MC, Logue DM (2003) Population differentiation in a complex bird sound: a comparison of three bioacoustical analysis procedures. Ethology 109:223–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briskie JV, Martin PR, Martin TE (1999) Nest predation and the evolution of nestling begging calls. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:2153–2159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooker MG, Brooker LC (1989) Cuckoo hosts in Australia. Aust Zool Rev 2:1–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JC, Smaragdis P (2009) Hidden Markov and Gaussian mixture models for automatic call classification. J Acoust Soc Am 125(6):EL221–EL224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butchart SHM, Kilner RM, Fuisz T, Davies NB (2003) Differences in the nestling begging calls of hosts and host-races of the common cuckoo, Cuculus canorus. Anim Behav 65(2):345–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardoso GC, Gama P, Depraz V (2007) Female and male serins (Serinus serinus) respond differently to derived song traits. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61(9):1425–1436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charif RA, Clark CW, Fristrup KM (2007) Raven Pro 1.3 User's manual. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. edn

  • Christidis L, Boles WE (2008) Systematics and taxonomy of Australian birds. Collingwood, Vic. : CSIRO Pub.

  • Clemins PJ, Johnson MT (2006) Generalized perceptual linear prediction features for animal vocalization analysis. J Acoust Soc Am 120(1):527–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davies NB (2000) Cuckoos, cowbirds and other cheats. T & A D Poyser, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies NB, Brooke De L M, Kacelnik A (1996) Recognition errors and probability of parasitism determine whether reed warblers should accept or reject mimetic eggs. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 263(1372):925–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis SB, Mermelstein P (1980) Comparison of parametric representations for monosyllabic word recognition in continuously spoken sentences. IEEE transactions on acoustics, speech, and signal processing 28(4):357–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill BJ (1983) Brood parasitism by the shining cuckoo Chrysococcyx lucidus at Kaikoura, New Zealand. Ibis 125:40–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill P, Zhang J, Woolley SMN, Fremouw T, Theunissen FE (2006) Sound representation methods for spectro-temporal receptive field estimation. J Comput Neurosci 21(1):5–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grim T (2005) Mimicry vs. similarity: which resemblances between brood parasites and their hosts are mimetic and which are not? Biol J Linn Soc 84:69–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim T (2006) The evolution of nestling discrimination by hosts of parasitic birds: why is rejection so rare? Evol Ecol Res 8:785–802

    Google Scholar 

  • Grim T, Kleven O, Mikulica O (2003) Nestling discrimination without recognition: a possible defence mechanism for hosts towards cuckoo parasitism? Proc R Soc Lond B 270(suppl 1):S73–S75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerra JE, Cruz-Nieto J, Ortiz-Maciel SG, Wright TF (2008) Limited geographic variation in the vocalizations of the endangered thick-billed parrot: implications for conservation strategies. The Condor 110(4):639–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauber ME (2003) Lower begging responsiveness of host versus parasitic brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) nestlings is related to species identity but not to early social experience. J Comp Psychol 117(1):24–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hauber ME, Kilner RM (2007) Who mimics whom? communication, co-evolution, and chick mimicry in parasitic finches. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:497–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauber ME, Cassey P, Woolley SMN, Theunissen FE (2007) Neurophysiological response selectivity for conspecific songs over synthetic sounds in the auditory forebrain of non-singing female songbirds. J Comp Physiol A Sens Neural Behav Physiol 193:765–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honza M, Vošlajerová K, Moskát C (2007) Eviction behaviour of the common cuckoo Cuculus canorus chicks. J Avian Biol 38(3):385–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu A, Woolley SMN, Fremouw TE, Theunissen FE (2004) Modulation power and phase spectrum of natural sounds enhance neural encoding performed by single auditory neurons. J Neurosci 24(41):9201–9211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kogan JA, Margoliash D (1998) Automated recognition of bird song elements from continuous recordings using dynamic time warping and hidden markov models: a comparative study. J Acoust Soc Am 103(4):2185–2196

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langmore NE, Kilner RM (2007) Breeding site and host selection by Horsfield's bronze-cuckoos, Chalcites basalis. Anim Behav 74:995–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langmore NE, Hunt S, Kilner RM (2003) Escalation of a coevolutionary arms race through host rejection of brood parasitic young. Nature 422(6928):157–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langmore NE, Maurer G, Adcock GJ, Kilner RM (2008) Socially acquired host-specific mimicry and the evolution of host races in Horsfield's bronze-cuckoo Chalcites basalis. Evolution 62(7):1689–1699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langmore NE, Cockburn A, Russell AF, Kilner RM (2009) Flexible cuckoo chick-rejection rules in the superb fairy-wren. Behav Ecol 20(5):978–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latham J (1802) Supplementum indicis ornithologici, sive systematis ornithologiae. G. Leigh, J. & S, Sotheby, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesica NA, Grothe B (2008) Efficient temporal processing of naturalistic sounds. PLoS ONE 3(2):e1655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki MS (2002) Efficient coding of natural sounds. Nat Neurosci 5:356–363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manly BFJ (1997) Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Margoliash D (1983) Acoustic parameters underlying the responses of song-specific neurons in the white-crowned sparrow. J Neurosci 3:1039–1057

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matheron Nocolas, Aubin T, Vielliard J, da Silva M-L, Sebe F, Boscolo D (2008) Singing in the rain forest: how a tropical bird song transfers information. PLoS ONE 3(2):e1580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLean IG (1988) Breeding behaviour of the long-tailed cuckoo on little barrier island. Notornis 35:89–98

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean IG, Waas JR (1987) Do cuckoo chicks mimic the begging calls of their hosts? Anim Behav 35(6):1896–1898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moskát C, Hauber ME (2007) Conflict between egg recognition and egg rejection decisions in common cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) hosts. Anim Cogn 10(4):1435–9448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naugler C, Ratcliffe L (1992) A field test of the sound environment hypothesis of conspecific song recognition in American tree sparrows (Spizella arborea). Behaviour 123(3–4):314–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne RB (2005) The Cuckoos. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne RB, Payne LL (1998) Nestling eviction and vocal begging behaviors in the Australian glossy cuckoos Chrysococcyx basalis and C. lucidus. In: Rothstein SI, Robinson S (eds) Parasitic birds and their hosts: Studies in coevolution. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 152–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranjard L, Ross HA (2008) Unsupervised bird song syllable classification using evolving neural networks. J Acoust Soc Am 123(6):4358–4368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sewall KB (2009) Limited adult vocal learning maintains call dialects but permits pair-distinctive calls in red crossbills. Anim Behav 77(5):1303–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh NC, Theunissen FE (2003) Modulation spectra of natural sounds and ethological theories of auditory processing. J Acoust Soc Am 114(6 Pt 1):3394–3411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. W.H. Freeman and Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Soler M (2009) Co-evolutionary arms race between brood parasites and their hosts at the nestling stage. J Avian Biol 40(3):237–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tao J, Johnson MT, Osiejuk TS (2008) Acoustic model adaptation for ortolan bunting (Emberiza hortulana L.) song-type classification. J Acoust Soc Am 123(3):1582–1590

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tchernichovski O, Nottebohm F, Ho CE, Pesaran B, Mitra PP (2000) A procedure for an automated measurement of song similarity. Anim Behav 59(5):1167–1176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • The Mathworks, Natick, MA (2008) Matlab 7.7.0.471 (R2008b). URL http://www.mathworks.com

  • Trawicki MB, Johnson MT, Osiejuk TS (2005) Automatic song-type classification and speaker identification of Norwegian ortolan bunting (Emberiza hortulana) vocalizations. In: 2005 IEEE Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing, pp 277–282, URL http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac? punumber = 10270

  • Vallejo EE, Cody ML, Taylor CE (2007) Unsupervised acoustic classification of bird species using hierarchical self-organizing maps. In: Randall M, Abbass HA, Wiles J (eds) Progress in artificial life, third Australian conference, ACAL 2007 gold coast, Australia, December 4–6, Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, lecture notes in computer science, vol 4828/2007, pp 212–221

  • Vyas A, Harding C, Borg L, Bogdan D (2009) Acoustic characteristics, early experience, and endocrine status interact to modulate female zebra finches' behavioral responses to songs. Horm Behav 55:50–59

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley SMN, Rubel EW (2002) Vocal memory and learning in adult bengalese finches with regenerated hair cells. J Neurosci 22(17):7774–7787

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley SMN, Fremouw TE, Hsu A, Theunissen FE (2005) Tuning for spectro-temporal modulations as a mechanism for auditory discrimination of natural sounds. Nat Neurosci 8(10):1371–1379

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Young SJ (1994) The HTK hidden markov model toolkit: design and philosophy. entropic cambridge research laboratory. Ltd 2:2–44

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Phillip Cassey, Brian Gill, Tomas Grim, Rebecca Kilner, Todd Landers, Naomi Langmore, Arnon Lotem, Luis Ortiz Catedral, Kevin Parker, and Allen Rodrigo for discussions and comments. Fieldwork was conducted with permission from the Auckland Regional Council, Department of Conservation, and the Massey University Animal Ethics Committee. We are grateful for field assistance by many helpers, too numerous to mention here (see http://www.massey.ac.nz/dhbrunto/ppl/MichaelAnderson.htm). Funding was provided from a Bright Futures Top Achiever Scholarship, Massey University (M.G.A.), the National Geographic Society and the Human Frontier Science Program (to M.E.H.), and two New Zealand Marsden Fund Grants (M.E.H.; D.H.B. and H.A.R.).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Matt J. Rayner

    Present address: National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd. (NIWA), P.O. Box 99940, Newmarket, 1149, New Zealand

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bioinformatics Institute, School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland Mail Centre, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Louis Ranjard & Howard A. Ross

  2. Ecology and Conservation Group, Institute of Natural Sciences, Massey University, Albany Campus, Private Bag 102-904, North Shore Mail Centre, Auckland, New Zealand

    Michael G. Anderson & Dianne H. Brunton

  3. School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand

    Matt J. Rayner & Mark E. Hauber

  4. University of Michigan, 1306 Granger Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Robert B. Payne

  5. Department of Zoology, Otago University, P.O.Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Ian McLean

  6. School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand

    James V. Briskie

  7. Department of Psychology, Columbia University, 406 Schermerhorn Hall, 1190 Amsterdam Ave, New York, NY, 10027, USA

    Sarah M. N. Woolley

  8. Department of Psychology, Hunter College, City University of New York, 695 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Mark E. Hauber

Authors
  1. Louis Ranjard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael G. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matt J. Rayner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert B. Payne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ian McLean
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. James V. Briskie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Howard A. Ross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Dianne H. Brunton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Sarah M. N. Woolley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Mark E. Hauber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louis Ranjard.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Soler

Louis Ranjard, Michael G. Anderson contributed equally to the research

Electronic supplementary materials

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Online Resource 1

Rank order of the similarity to the begging calls of the parasitic shining cuckoo in New Zealand and its grey warbler host, for each acoustic distance measure. The parasite and its host are highlighted and the species of the genus Chalcites are marked (†, dagger). The names of the shining cuckoo hosts are in brackets and abbreviated for g.w., grey warbler; w.t., western thornbill; and y.r.t., yellow-rumped thornbill. (DOC 50 kb)

Online Resource 2

Rank order of the similarity to the begging calls of the parasitic shining cuckoo in Western Australia and its western thornbill host, for each acoustic distance measure. The parasite and its host are highlighted and the species of the genus Chalcites are marked (†, dagger). The names of the shining cuckoo hosts are in brackets and abbreviated for g.w., grey warbler; w.t., western thornbill; and y.r.t., yellow-rumped thornbill. (DOC 52 kb)

Online Resource 3

Rank order of the similarity to the begging calls of the parasitic Horsfield's bronze-cuckoo in Western Australia and its western thornbill host, for each acoustic distance measure. The parasite and its host are highlighted and the species of the genus Chalcites are marked (†, dagger). The names of the shining cuckoo hosts are in brackets and abbreviated for g.w., grey warbler; w.t., western thornbill; and y.r.t., yellow-rumped thornbill. (DOC 51 kb)

Online Resource 4

Rank order of the similarity to the begging calls of the parasitic long-tailed cuckoo in New Zealand and its yellowhead, whitehead, and brown creeper hosts, for each acoustic distance measure. The parasite and its host are highlighted and the species of the genus Chalcites are marked (†, dagger). The names of the shining cuckoo hosts are in brackets and abbreviated for g.w., grey warbler; w.t., western thornbill; and y.r.t., yellow-rumped thornbill. (DOC 54 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ranjard, L., Anderson, M.G., Rayner, M.J. et al. Bioacoustic distances between the begging calls of brood parasites and their host species: a comparison of metrics and techniques. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64, 1915–1926 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1065-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1065-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation