Annurev Ecolsys 35 021103 105719

Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2004. 35:5587 doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105719 Copyright c 2004 by Annual Reviews.
All rights reserved First published online as a Review in Advance on June 10, 2004
BIRD SONG: The Interface of Evolution

and Mechanism
Jeffrey Podos, Sarah K. Huber, and Benjamin Taft
Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2004.35:55-87. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org by Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte on 08/13/13. For personal use only.
Department of Biology and Graduate Program in Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003; email: jpodos@bio.umass.edu, shuber@bio.umass.edu, btaft@bio.umass.edu
Key Words sexual selection, cultural transmission, neurobiology, biomechanics Abstract Bird song provides an unusually impressive illustration of vertebrate behavioral diversication. Research on bird song evolution traditionally focuses on factors that enhance song diversity, such as cultural transmission and sexual selection. Recent advances in the study of proximate mechanisms of vocal behavior, however, provide opportunities for studying mechanistic constraints on song evolution. The main goal of this review is to examine, from both conceptual and empirical perspectives, how proximate mechanisms might temper patterns of song evolution. We provide an overview of the two substrates of song evolution, memes and vocal mechanisms. We argue that properties of vocal mechanisms (control, production, and ontogeny) constrain vocal potential and may thus limit pathways of meme evolution. We then consider how vocal mechanisms may constrain song evolution under ve scenarios of drift and selection and examine four specic song traits for which mechanistic constraints appear to counter the diversifying effects of sexual selection. These examples illustrate the interplay between meme evolution as a diversifying inuence and proximate limitations as a barrier to song divergence. We conclude by suggesting that vocal mechanisms not only constrain song evolution but also can facilitate the evolution of novel vocal features.
INTRODUCTION
The songs of songbirds are among the most celebrated examples of behavioral diversication in the animal kingdom (Catchpole & Slater 1995, Baptista & Kroodsma 2001). Most species songs are distinct, a fact long appreciated by naturalists. Studies during recent decades have documented extensive song variation at additional levels of organization including within species, populations, and individuals. We have learned, for example, that the songs of rufous-collared sparrows (Zonotrichia capensis) vary broadly in the structure of their terminal trills (Handford & Lougheed 1991), that individual brown thrashers (Toxostoma rufum) can produce thousands of distinct song types (Kroodsma & Parker 1977),
1543-592X/04/1215-0055$14.00
55
56
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
and that Lincolns sparrows (Melospiza lincolnii) introduce subtle variations into song types nearly each time they are sung (Cicero & Benowitz-Fredericks 2000). Explaining the evolutionary origins and maintenance of phenotypic diversity is a principal challenge in the study of bird song. Current research on bird song tends to emphasize the lability of song structure in evolution. As is true for many mating signals, sexual selection by female choice is thought to facilitate the evolution of elaborate and distinct song traits (reviewed by Searcy & Yasukawa 1996). Intrasexual selection may also contribute to song diversication by favoring individually distinctive song patterns. In species that learn to sing by imitation, songs can diversify rapidly through the accumulation of copying inaccuracies during cultural transmission (Payne 1996). Vocal diversity also appears to be enhanced through the correlated evolution of song structure and life history or ecological variables such as migratory habits (Nelson et al. 1996, Peters et al. 2000, Kroodsma et al. 2002) and the density of breeding territories (Kroodsma 1977, Catchpole 1980). Although bird song may be unusually susceptible to change over evolutionary time, it is still not free to evolve in any direction at any time. All phenotypic traits are tempered in their evolution by intrinsic constraints on genetic variation and mechanical design (Gould 1980, Wake 1991, Arnold 1992). The strong genetic covariance of traits, for example, can bias phenotype evolution in directions that do not necessarily match those specied by selection pressures (Schluter 1996). Behavioral traits such as song can be further tempered in their evolution by limits on neuromuscular capacity and performance abilities. Rapidly modulated communication displays, such as electric organ discharges in shes or rattle signals in snakes, are circumscribed in their structure by maximum rates of neural activity and muscular contraction (Kramer 1990, Rome et al. 1996). Studies of intrinsic constraints are of broad value because they help to specify the range of phenotypes that can be expressed and on which selection can act (Perrin & Travis 1992). In the study of bird songs, the idea of constraints is often raised in conjunction with evidence for stasis during song learning and evolution. Experimental studies of song learning have revealed innate predispositions in some species for copying conspecic song models in preference to heterospecic song models (e.g., Marler & Peters 1977, Nelson & Marler 1993). Studies of isolate-reared, crossspecies-reared, and hybrid songbirds have documented high genetic heritability in numerous song features such as note and song duration, rhythm, and repertoire size (Baptista 1996). Furthermore, comparative surveys both within and across species indicate that some song traits are strongly conserved over evolutionary time (Marler & Pickert 1984, Payne 1986, Price & Lanyon 2002). These lines of evidence suggest that genetic biases guide young birds to develop and produce specic kinds of sounds, even among species that learn by imitation. If sustained over a sufcient evolutionary time frame, genetic biases presumably could limit the diversication of song phenotypes. Evidence for stasis during song development and evolution, however, might also be explained by stabilizing selection and, thus, provides only weak insight into constraint-based hypotheses.
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM
57
A stronger argument for evolutionary constraints on behavior can be made through functional analysis of proximate mechanisms such as neural organization and biomechanical performance (e.g., Garland & Losos 1994, Herrel et al. 2002). In recent decades, bird song has become a particularly valuable model system for studies of the neural bases of complex, learned behavior (Konishi 1985, Brainard & Doupe 2002), and great strides have also been made in understanding how vocal morphology and physiology contribute to song production (Suthers et al. 1999). Studies on both topics have been motivated largely by curiosity about behavioral mechanisms. Yet, advances in our understanding of vocal mechanisms might also point to biases and opportunities in the evolution of vocal traits, in ways that are just beginning to be explored (Nowicki et al. 1992, Lambrechts 1996, Suthers & Goller 1997, Gil & Gahr 2002, Ten Cate et al. 2002, Podos & Nowicki 2004). Our goal here is to examine, from both conceptual and empirical perspectives, how vocal mechanisms might impose constraints on song evolution. We begin with an overview of the two substrates of song evolution, memes and vocal mechanisms. Next, we consider how vocal mechanisms may impose constraints under different scenarios of drift and selection. We examine in detail four song traits for which recent evidence suggests that mechanistic features constrain song elaboration in opposition to sexual selection. Finally, we argue that vocal mechanisms not only constrain song evolution but also can facilitate the evolution of novel song features.
SUBSTRATES OF SONG EVOLUTION

A rst step in any discussion of song evolution is to identify the units that are transmitted across generations. Like other complex behavioral phenotypes, bird vocalizations can be regarded as composites of discrete traits, arranged at different levels of organization and varying across time (Tinbergen 1951). Ornithologists typically label the most basic units of organization in bird songs as notes, identied on sound spectrographs as continuous traces separated by silent gaps (Figure 1). Individual notes are dened by their time-varying frequency structure (phonology), amplitude proles, and timbre, which is the distribution of acoustic energy across fundamental frequencies and harmonic overtones (e.g., Marler 1969, Clark et al. 1987). Notes typically are arranged in higher-order groupings such as note complexes or syllables (Figure 1), which are produced by birds in sequence to form songs. The structure of songs across species is immensely variable (Figure 1). Additional traits occur at higher levels of song organization, such as in patterns of song delivery and in the occurrence of song repertoires. Because songs are composite entities, vocal evolution is perhaps best viewed as the product of evolutionary change (or stasis) in multiple, potentially independent traits. This view is consistent with the traditional ethological view for which multitrait analyses have revealed independent evolutionary trajectories in some behavioral display components (e.g., Lorenz 1950, Prum 1990). In the study of
58
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
Figure 1 Spectrograms of ve representative passerine songs. Songs exhibit different levels of organization and signicant structural variation among species. (A) Song sparrow, Melospiza melodia (Emberizidae). A representative note, syllable, and trill are marked with brackets. (B) Satin bowerbird, Ptilonorhynchus violaceus (Ptilonorhynchidae). (C) Canyon wren, Catherpes mexicanus (Troglodytidae). (D) Small tree nch, Camarhynchus parvulus (Emberizidae). (E) Thrush nightingale, Luscinia megarhynchos (Turdidae).
59
bird songs, phylogenetic analyses have revealed independent trajectories for the evolution of different song traits within lineages, such as in the oropendolas and caciques (Price & Lanyon 2002, 2004; see also Payne 1996, Slabbekoorn & Smith 2002b). How, then, are song traits transmitted across generations? In this review, we focus our discussion on songbirds that learn their songs by imitation. We argue that patterns of song evolution can be attributed to changes in two distinct substrates: (a) memes and (b) mechanisms of vocal control, production, and ontogeny.
Memes
Memes refer to cultural traditions that are transmitted between individuals through imitation (Dawkins 1976, Bonner 1980, Boyd & Richerson 1985). The best-known examples of memes in nonhuman animals are social feeding strategies and vocal traditions (e.g., Heyes 1994, Noad et al. 2000). Memes may evolve through population-level sorting among transmitted units, as illustrated in changing patterns of word use or loss within human languages (Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman 1981). Alternatively, memes may evolve through the progressive transformation of transmitted units themselves, as has been demonstrated within the songs of humpback whales (Payne et al. 1983). Our discussion of bird song evolution focuses on the latter process; detailed reviews of bird song population memetics are available in Lynch (1996) and Payne (1996). Observations of avian song learning before the 1950s emphasized the temporal continuity of song memes. Bird breeders long recognized that student birds often faithfully reproduce song patterns of their vocal tutors (Thorpe 1961, Konishi 1985). The advent of spectrographic analyses made possible the examination of patterns of song change as well. Some of the rst studies of song evolution focused on geographic variation in song traits, following the assumption that variation in space provides a window (albeit indirect) into causes of change over time. Marler (1960) documented song variations within several songbird species and hypothesized that these variations had emerged as a result of copying imprecision. Subsequent descriptive studies of geographic variation in song have supported and rened this hypothesis (e.g., Lemon 1975, Bitterbaum & Baptista 1979). In some species, song types tend to vary gradually across locality, with neighboring population pairs producing the most similar songs (Morton 1987, Irwin 2000). Such clinal variation suggests a free interchange of song memes between neighboring populations. Other species exhibit more pronounced geographic discontinuities in song structure, resulting in song dialects (Marler & Tamura 1962, Baptista 1975). Dialects generally occur in species with specic life-history and behavioral ecological traits such as limited dispersal, early song acquisition, and comparatively simple repertoires. This pattern is consistent with the hypothesis that copy inaccuracies contribute signicantly to song evolution (Slater 1986, Nelson 2000). Insight into the process by which song memes evolve has also been provided by laboratory studies of song learning. Marler & Tamura (1964) showed that
60
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
laboratory-reared white-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys) are able to produce remarkably precise copies of training models from both native and foreign dialects. Accurate song model reproduction has since been demonstrated in numerous additional species (e.g., Marler & Peters 1977, Kroodsma & Pickert 1980, Slater et al. 1988). Even the most accurate copies of song are not perfectly precise, however, and imprecisions can accumulate through time and result in song evolution. Thorpe (1961) identied two additional causes of song evolution: the rearrangement of accurately copied material and the invention of new material. Both possibilities have been documented in laboratory studies. For example, song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) were shown to combine elements from multiple tutor songs into common hybrid songs (Marler & Peters 1987, 1988; Beecher 1996), and sedge wrens (Cistothorus platensis) were shown to improvise novel songs as well as imitate members of their cohort during song development (Kroodsma 1996). Laboratory results are mirrored by patterns described in longitudinal eld studies. Studies tracking song changes in island populations have documented modications in the structure of individual notes that were retained in subsequent generations (Jenkins 1978, Grant & Grant 1996). Other studies documented instances in which notes were deleted or reordered during cultural transmission (Ince et al. 1980, Payne 1996) or in which notes from multiple models were blended together within copied song types (Slater 1989, Payne 1996; see also Slabbekoorn et al. 2003). Island birds have also been reported to evolve song types with novel syntax (e.g., Baker et al. 2003). Results from eld and laboratory studies together are consistent with broader denitions of meme evolution (Dawkins 1976, Boyd & Richerson 1985). Like other memes, songs are encoded as neural representations, are transmitted between individuals through environmental media, and incur inaccuracies during transmission that can be retained over time.
Mechanisms
Patterns of song meme evolutionwhether identied in the laboratory or eld and whether arising through copy error, innovation, or improvisationare normally, if implicitly, attributed to properties of the neural mechanisms that underlie song perception and memorization. For example, gradual shifts in song structure during evolution have been attributed to limits on how well birds are able to perceive and memorize song models during the sensory phase of song learning (Marler 1976, 1984; Slater 1989). Perceptual and memory-based hypotheses have also been proposed to explain more rapid meme diversication, such as when birds incorporate elements of different models into individual copies. To illustrate, Marler & Peters (1987, p. 99) speculated that birds hybridize acoustic elements from multiple models through a neural process in which stored songs are consolidated and reorganized before the onset of vocal motor ontogeny. The other side of the coinmeme stabilityis also normally attributed to mechanisms of
61
perception and memorization. Kroodsma et al. (1999), for example, proposed that the remarkable structural uniformity of black-capped chickadee songs across mainland North America reects a tendency of these birds to memorize and average multiple song models. The neural mechanisms that underlie these kinds of processes (e.g., consolidation, reorganization, and averaging) are presently unspecied. In general, much more work will be needed to link species perceptual and memory-based predispositions and capabilities to properties of their neural mechanisms. In contrast to our lack of understanding of mechanisms of perception and memorization, we have made great strides in characterizing the proximate mechanisms that underlie song control, production, and ontogeny. In the remainder of this section, we provide a brief description of these mechanisms and consider how modications to them may shape patterns of meme evolution. The source of vocalizations in birds is the syrinx, an organ unique to the class Aves (Greenewalt 1968). The syrinx is located within the thoracic cavity at or near the base of the trachea. Sound is produced when air ow from the lungs causes syringeal tissues to vibrate (Goller & Larsen 1997, Larsen & Goller 1999). Vocal production depends also on a suite of complementary motor and neural systems. Simultaneous recording of bronchial airow and thoracic air-sac pressure has revealed that respiratory and syringeal motor patterns are tightly coupled (Suthers et al. 1994, Suthers 1997), insofar as vocal output normally occurs only during expirations (cf. Goller & Daley 2001). Anatomical components of the vocal tract anterior to the syrinx (the trachea, larynx, and beak) modify the spectral structure of vocalizations produced by the syrinx (Nowicki 1987, Westneat et al. 1993, Beckers et al. 2003). Sound generated by the syrinx contains acoustic energy at wide ranges of frequencies. As sound passes through the vocal tract, however, harmonic overtones tend to be selectively attenuated, whereas fundamental frequencies tend to pass unimpeded. The vocal tract is, thus, responsible for the pure-tonal, musical quality of many bird songs (Nowicki & Marler 1988). Nearly three decades of work has shown that the activity of the vocal apparatus is mediated by a series of interconnected brain nuclei that function in a hierarchical manner (Nottebohm et al. 1976, Yu & Margoliash 1996, Hahnloser et al. 2002). The motor pathway of song production features prominent song nuclei that project to syringeal and respiratory musculature. Lesion studies by Nottebohm et al. (1976) showed that the motor pathway is required for successful song production in adult birds (see also McCasland 1987, Simpson & Vicario 1990). Two of the most prominent brain nuclei, HVc and RA, undergo annual changes in size consistent with seasonal variation in vocal output (Nottebohm et al. 1986). Furthermore, these nuclei and their constituent cells tend to be larger in males than in females in species in which only males sing (Nottebohm & Arnold 1976, Arnold 1990), whereas no such difference is found in a duetting species in which both males and females sing (Brenowitz et al. 1985). Information about the organization of song nuclei has enabled direct exploration of the cellular bases of song development and production (Brainard & Doupe 2002).
62
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
Vocal ontogeny refers to the translation of memorized song models into stereotyped vocal motor patterns during the sensorimotor phase of song learning (Slater 1989). During this phase, the songs of young birds progress from a babblelike rudimentary form (subsong) to a highly stereotyped adult form (crystallized song; Thorpe 1961, Marler & Peters 1982). This progression appears to reect a need for young birds to practice and rene their ability to reproduce previously memorized models (Marler 1984, Podos et al. 1995). Studies of deafened birds established that successful vocal learning requires auditory feedback in which birds compare the auditory experience of their own vocalizations to neural templates of previously memorized models (Konishi 1965, 1985). Neurobiologists have made substantial progress in identifying the neural control pathways that mediate auditory feedback (Bottjer et al. 1984, Williams & Mehta 1999) and in characterizing cellular changes that occur in these pathways during ontogeny (Livingston et al. 2000). Advances in our understanding of the proximate mechanisms of vocal control, production, and ontogeny provide new opportunities for studying constraints on song evolution. The central premise we adopt here is that song features may be limited in their expression by properties of vocal mechanisms, and these properties may persist over evolutionary time. On the smallest of evolutionary time scales, from one generation to the next, evidence for mechanistic constraints on song evolution has been limited. On the contrary, some species have been shown to be able to reproduce the song models of heterospecic tutors accurately (e.g., Baptista & Petrinovich 1984), which suggests that song development is normally not restricted by limits on how birds are able to produce sound (Marler 1976, 1984; Konishi 1985). Over broader evolutionary time scales, however, we expect meme diversication to be tempered by limits of mechanical possibility or at least to be biased to evolve in specic directions because of mechanistic features. One way to articulate this point is to consider the distinction between potential and actual (or realized) song phenotypes, as conceptualized in Figure 2 (see also Podos 1996, 1997; Slabbekoorn & Smith 2002a). Mechanistic constraints circumscribe a lineages range of potential song phenotypes, within which memes are free to evolve (Figure 2B). However, memes and mechanistic boundaries may sometimes intersect because of evolutionary changes in either or both (Figure 2D,F), and mechanisms may, thus, limit or at least bias subsequent patterns of song evolution. It is important to note that constraints need not be absolute but rather can be modied over the course of evolution (Figure 2C,E,F). To illustrate, song nucleus volume is thought to exert mechanistic limits on repertoire size (see section below, Song Trait Evolution). If selection pressure on song repertoire size is sufciently strong, we might, therefore, expect to observe increases in song nucleus volume. Yet, such an adjustment would not come without a cost. In our example, increases in brain volume would presumably result in reduced allocation of developmental or metabolic resources to other traits. Such trade-offs have also been regarded as evidence for constraints (Maynard Smith et al. 1985, Perrin & Travis 1992).
63
Figure 2 Schematic overview of some possible interactions between memes and mechanisms during song evolution. This illustration expands upon gure 3 of Slabbekoorn & Smith (2002). Gray shaded areas indicate realized song phenotypes, i.e., all memes within a population, and black lines (circles) encompass the range of potential song phenotypes, as delimited by mechanistic constraints. Arrows indicate pathways of evolution caused by selection, drift, or both. (A) Realized song variation may not intersect with potential song variation. In this scenario, initial evolutionary changes in song (B) will occur unimpeded, and song evolution will be tantamount to meme evolution. (C) When realized and potential song phenotypes initially do not intersect, minor evolutionary changes in vocal potential should not affect song evolution. (D) Evolutionary pressures, especially sexual selection, should eventually push memes to the boundary of physical possibility. Further song evolution in the direction indicated will be constrained at least in the absence of any changes in vocal mechanisms. (E) Subsequent evolutionary changes in vocal mechanisms may occur independently of meme evolution. (F) Alternatively, evolutionary changes in vocal mechanisms may set further constraints on song evolution.
CAUSES OF SONG EVOLUTION

Like other phenotypic traits, song evolves through a combination of drift and selection. We now consider if and how mechanistic constraints might inuence song evolution under ve different scenarios of drift and selection.
64
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
Cultural Drift
Cultural drift refers to changes in song memes driven by chance (nonfunctional) variation in their propagation across generations. Cultural drift in song evolution has been discussed primarily in two specic contexts: during initial stages of dialect formation and during the colonization of islands. As discussed earlier, dialects appear to form through a process of cultural diversication in which copy errors generate seemingly random song mutations (Lemon 1975). Vocal forms in island populations often represent restricted and simplied subsets of vocal forms found in mainland populations. This reduction in diversity has been attributed to the susceptibility of small colonizing populations to founder effects and rapid cultural drift (Thielcke 1972, Baker et al. 2003). No empirical evidence to date supports a role for mechanistic constraints on meme drift (Figure 2B).
Genetic Drift
Random drift in the genetic loci that underlie vocal mechanisms presumably could also inuence song evolution by modifying a lineages vocal potential, although we are not aware of any such demonstration in the literature. We expect that genetic drift would inuence song evolution only when memes are initially produced at or near some mechanistic limit, and when drift occurs in directions that cause the proximate limits of vocal mechanisms to intersect with meme properties (Figure 2F). We illustrate this argument using a hypothetical example. The acoustic frequencies of bird songs generally correlate negatively with syrinx mass (Cutler 1970, Wallschl ager 1980). This is because the minimum vocal frequencies that a bird can produce depend on syrinx mass, with smaller birds (with lighter syringes) constrained to sing at higher frequencies. What would happen, then, to the acoustic frequencies of song in the event of genetic drift in syrinx mass? We envision three possibilities: (a) Song frequencies may not initially have challenged the frequency limitations of the syrinx, for instance by being produced well within the range of possibilities determined by syrinx mass. Minor changes in syrinx mass and corresponding vocal potential would thus have little or no bearing on the evolution of vocal frequencies, at least initially (Figure 2C). (b) Song frequencies might initially have been produced at mechanistic limits, for instance at the lowest frequencies that a syrinx of given mass could support. Subsequent drift in syrinx mass may occur but in a direction that does not inuence song evolution (Figure 2E). For instance, increases in syrinx mass presumably would not limit the accurate reproduction of low-frequency song components during meme transmission. (c) Frequencies may have initially been produced at mechanistic limits, and changes in vocal potential occur in specic directions that constrain song frequency evolution (Figure 2F). If our hypothetical population initially had produced song components at their lowest possible frequencies, then subsequent reductions in syrinx mass would presumably limit copying accuracy and thus bias songs to evolve toward higher frequencies. As this example is intended to illustrate, evolutionary changes in vocal mechanisms
65
need to be directional and of signicant magnitude if they are to inuence song evolution.
Cultural Selection
Cultural selection refers to the differential propagation of memes across generations based on variation in their effectiveness as communication signals. Moreover, unlike natural and sexual selection (see below), cultural selection on song memes is not powered by variation in the relative tness of birds in a population. Perhaps the best illustration of this process involves selection for optimal sound transmission. Songs vary in how well they transmit in different acoustic environments. In forested habitats, for example, songs with slow repetitions and low frequencies suffer less degradation than do songs with fast repetitions and high frequencies, whereas the opposite trend is observed in open habitats (Marten & Marler 1977, Richards & Wiley 1980, Brown & Handford 2000). Thus, for populations with multiple song types, the types that transmit best in a specic acoustic environment should be more effective and thus favored as communication signals. Hansen (1979) hypothesized that song types that transmit best in a given habitat will be heard more often by young birds as training models and will thus be inherited at disproportionately high rates across generations. Documented correlations between acoustic habitats and song structure are consistent with these hypotheses (e.g., Wiley 1991), although, as noted by Morton (1975, p. 33), such correlations may also arise through natural or sexual selection. Cultural selection seems most relevant as an explanation for song differences among closely related populations (e.g., Hunter & Krebs 1979, Handford & Lougheed 1991, Doutrelant et al. 1999). At this level, songs appear to adapt readily to varying environmental conditions and to evolve relatively independently of mechanistic constraints (Figure 2B). As temporal and spatial scales broaden, however, gene ow among populations diminishes (MacDougall-Shackleton & MacDougall-Shackleton 2001), and mechanistic constraints should thus take on greater relevance. Broad comparative analyses by Ryan & Brenowitz (1985) and Bertelli & Tubaro (2002), for example, showed that song evolution can be inuenced not only by cultural selection but also by genetic (body mass) constraints.
Natural Selection
Natural selection on song evolution may be direct, acting on memes, or indirect, acting on vocal mechanisms. The most widely discussed hypotheses of natural selection on bird song focus on direct selection against song meme overlap, through a process of reinforcement and reproductive character displacement (Butlin & Ritchie 1994). Many songbird species retain the ability to produce hybrids long after their divergence from a common ancestor (Grant & Grant 1992). Hybrid production can be disadvantageous, however, because hybrid offspring often suffer from genetic deciencies (for example, leading to reduced fertility) or poor t to available ecological niches. Natural selection is, therefore, expected to favor
66
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
individuals that select conspecic rather than heterospecic mates. Songs are often the principal source of information about singer identity and are thus expected to evolve toward increasing species-level distinctiveness (Marler 1957, 1960; Ptacek 2000). Reinforcement hypotheses have received support from descriptive and experimental sources. Nelson & Marler (1990) showed that the songs of 13 sympatric species were distributed widely across acoustic space, a pattern consistent with a history of acoustic competition and divergence. Songs of birds in island populations, which face relatively few acoustic competitors, are often more variable than the songs of continental conspecics (Thielcke 1972, Naugler & Ratcliffe 1994; but see Espmark 1999), a pattern that suggests a history of relaxed selection for species distinctiveness on islands. Playback studies in many species have shown that birds respond most strongly to songs with conspecic parameters (e.g., Br emond 1976, Becker 1982, Baker 1996). More relevant are playback studies in species pairs with allopatric and sympatric populations. In these studies, sympatric populations tend to discriminate against each other more strongly than do allopatric populations (Irwin & Price 1999; see also De Kort & Ten Cate 2001). Natural selection through reinforcement appears to shape meme evolution primarily by modifying birds perceptual and learning preferences, which are expected to evolve together with evolutionary changes and divergence in song structure (Grant & Grant 1997, Irwin & Price 1999). Other forms of direct natural selection are possible. Evolutionary trends toward increased song output (and thus conspicuousness) might be countered by increased susceptibility to predation or parasitism (Zuk & Kolluru 1998), although we are not aware of any such demonstration in birds. In all the circumstances described above, natural selection acts directly on meme function and may occur independently of vocal potential (Figure 2B). A contrasting class of natural selection pressures alters song evolution indirectly by adjusting the range of potential phenotypes a population can produce. The effects of indirect natural selection on song evolution depend on the relationship between vocal potential and the memes produced in a population, as outlined earlier in our discussion of genetic drift. Darwins nches provide a good illustration of how indirect evolution of song mechanisms may constrain meme evolution. These birds are well known for their diversity in beak form and function. This diversity is the result of natural selection for varying ecological conditions, such as food availability and interspecic competition (PR Grant & BR Grant 2002). Like other songbirds, Darwins nches also use their beaks in sound production to rapidly modify the resonance properties of the vocal tract as they shift vocal frequencies (Podos et al. 2004b). Analyses of song features in Darwins nches in relation to the songs of other species (Podos 1997) and in relation to beak morphology (Podos 2001) suggest that large-beaked birds have faced persistent constraints on the evolution of vocal features that require rapid vocal tract dynamics. Thus, the evolutionary diversication of feeding morphology in these birds appears to have
67
had indirect effects on vocal performance and song evolution (Figure 2F) (Podos & Nowicki 2004). As a caveat, beak evolution by natural selection need not inuence song evolution, as indicated in studies of sharp-beaked ground nches (Geospiza difcilis; BR Grant & PR Grant 2002) and black-bellied seed-crackers (Pyrenestes ostrinus; Slabbekoorn & Smith 2000). For these species, memes may not initially have been produced at mechanistic limits, so that subsequent beak adaptations imposed no detectable constraints on song phenotypes (Figure 2C,E) (Podos & Nowicki 2004).
Sexual Selection
Bird songs are produced most often by males and appear to function primarily in male-male competition and mate attraction (Searcy & Andersson 1986, Catchpole & Slater 1995). Research on song evolution and diversication has, therefore, emphasized sexual selection as a mechanism of evolutionary change. The theory of sexual selection posits that different display variants within a population vary in their effectiveness with regard to mate competition, that more effective song variants are retained over evolutionary time, and that female preferences evolve together with male display traits (Darwin 1871, Andersson 1994). The evolution of female preferences may be initiated by a number of factors, including natural selection or genetic correlations between female preferences and male traits (reviewed by Andersson 1994). Through the early 1990s, studies of sexual selection on bird songs and other vertebrate vocal displays focused on the factors responsible for the evolution of vocal complexity (Catchpole 1980, Searcy & Andersson 1986, Ryan & KeddyHector 1992). This focus was consistent with Darwins (1871) emphasis on sexual selection as a cause for the evolutionary elaboration of sexual ornaments and displays. Female preferences for complex male displays are thought to evolve under a variety of nonexclusive scenarios (reviewed by Kirkpatrick & Ryan 1991). Fisher (1930) hypothesized that female preferences and male trait complexity coevolve in a process of runaway sexual selection, in which genetic correlations between trait and preference drive their mutual escalation. Females gain indirect benets by mating with elaborate males; their male offspring are favored in subsequent generations as sexy sons. Holland & Rice (1998) offered an interesting twist on this idea by suggesting that females evolve increasingly strong resistance to (rather than preferences for) male traits and that trait complexity evolves in response to this resistance. Sensory exploitation hypotheses suggest that female preferences are derived from preexisting sensory biases that are exploited by signaling males (Basolo 1990, Ryan 1990, Proctor 1991). Few empirical data support any of these hypotheses for bird songs (but see Searcy 1992, Gray & Hagelin 1996) for at least two practical reasons: (a) The inuence of song learning makes identifying vocal genetic traits that might correlate with female preferences difcult, and (b) a paucity of strong cladistic hypotheses of avian relationships has made conducting comparative tests difcult.
68
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
Another set of hypotheses that has drawn considerable recent attention views songs as reliable indicators of male quality. The idea that signals provide honest indicators of male quality traces to Zahavis (1975) handicap model of signal evolution, which posits that males incur costs in signal production and that females choose mates on the basis of signals that best reect male quality (Hamilton & Zuk 1982, Kodric-Brown & Brown 1984). The benets females gain through choice of high-quality males can be direct (material) or indirect (genetic). In territorial birds, direct benets are often determined by territory quality. Males in highquality territories can provide females and offspring with superior food supplies and nesting locations and, thus, enhance a females survival and fecundity. Numerous lines of empirical evidence support a role for female choice in the evolution of bird song complexity (Searcy & Yasukawa 1996). In laboratory experiments, researchers have isolated the inuence of song on mate choice, through playback of songs to females in the absence of males. Females have been shown to respond more vigorously to complex vocal patterns than to simple vocal patterns (Catchpole et al. 1984, Searcy 1984). In the eld, researchers have identied correlations between vocal complexity and male mating success. Perhaps the clearest demonstration of this nding comes from Hasselquist et al. (1996), who showed that female great reed warblers (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) tend to seek extrapair copulations with males with song repertoires larger than those of their social mates. Researchers have also explored how intrasexual selection may have inuenced the evolution of vocal complexity, and results have been mixed. In some species, such as the Acrocephalus warblers, birds normally produce only simple song types in the context of territorial defense and reserve more complex song types for courtship (Catchpole 2000). Simpler song types apparently sufce in territorial defense for these birds. In other species, however, recent evidence points to a functional advantage in male-male contests for diverse song repertoires or variable song delivery patterns (Spector 1992, Byers 1996). An intriguing recent example was shown in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia) of western North America. In these birds, a repertoire of distinct song types appears to allow males to send graded signals for use in different territorial interactions. Direct song-type matching signals a high level of threat to territorial boundaries, whereas repertoire matching, in which birds respond to the song of a neighbor with a distinct yet shared song type, signals a less-pronounced threat (Beecher et al. 1996). Beecher et al. (2000) suggest that large repertoires in song sparrows are less a product of female choice than of selection for male-male song sharing and the opportunities provided therein for graded territorial signaling. In general, the ability to adjust information content during signaling interactions may favor large and diverse song repertoires (Naguib & Todt 1998, Vehrencamp 2001). Sustained directional sexual selection in any of the above scenarios should eventually drive song memes up against mechanistic boundaries (Figure 2D). This expectation is consistent with the argument that mating displays provide females with honest indicators of male status, which can only happen if signal expression
69
involves signicant costs (Grafen 1990). The costs of bird song might be incurred in a diversity of ways (see reviews by Gil & Gahr 2002, Ten Cate et al. 2002). Nowicki et al. (1998, 2002) propose that learned songs may serve as honest indicators of male quality because their accurate reproduction requires successful brain development in the face of nutritional stresses experienced early in life. According to this hypothesis, males express heritable variation in how much stress they experience during development, as well as in how well they respond to these stresses with respect to brain development. Males that successfully reproduce complex songs effectively advertise the high quality of their genes and developmental histories. Under such circumstances, females should be selected to evaluate male quality by assessing their songs (Nowicki et al. 1998, 2002). Particularly strong sexual selection may drive not only meme evolution but also evolutionary changes in vocal mechanisms to accommodate further meme evolution (Figure 2E).
SONG TRAIT EVOLUTION

We now focus our discussion on specic examples of song traits that appear to be limited in their evolution by mechanistic constraints (Figure 2D,F). We examine four traits that meet two criteria: (a) available evidence suggests they evolve by sexual selection and (b) tangible progress has been made in understanding their mechanistic bases (Table 1).
Repertoire Size
Song repertoires vary greatly among species in their organization and size, even within closely related groups (Kroodsma 1982). Within the Sylviid warblers, for example, the songs of Locustella species contain two to four distinct syllable types, whereas the songs of Acrocephalus species contain between 25 and 100 syllable types (Sz ekely et al. 1996). Numerous studies suggest that large repertoires are favored by sexual selection, although some concerns have been raised about the design and interpretation of these studies (Kroodsma 2004). In the laboratory, females tend to solicit copulations more often when they hear playback of multiple song types than when they hear playback of a single song type (Searcy 1984, 1992; Catchpole et al. 1986; Baker et al. 1987). Eens et al. (1991) showed that female starlings in aviaries choose males with larger song repertoires as their social mates. Field studies, some of which have controlled for potentially confounding factors such as age and territory quality, have identied correlations between male repertoire size and mating success (Searcy & Yasukawa 1990, Horn et al. 1993, Mountjoy & Lemon 1996, Buchanan & Catchpole 1997, Lampe & Espmark 2003). Krebs et al. (1978) showed that song repertoires are more effective than single song types as territorial keep-out signals. Subsequent research has identied a relationship in some species between repertoire size and successful territory
TABLE 1
References Size of brain nuclei Mechanistic constraint References
Evidence of sexual selection and mechanistic constraints for four song traits
70
Song trait
Evidence for sexual selection
Repertoire size
Repertoire size correlates with: early pairing date (Mountjoy & Lemon 1996) (Buchanan & Catchpole 1997) (Hasselquist et al. 1996)
PODOS
extrapair fertilizations
HUBER
Playback of larger repertoires induces more female display Greater utility of large repertoires in mediating territorial interactions Metabolic condition: cost of singing foraging success temperature immunocompetence Endocrine state (Wasserman & Cigliano 1991) (Collins et al. 1994) (Balzer & Williams 1998) (Vallet & Kreutzer 1995) (Vallet et al. 1998) (Draganoiu et al. 2002) (Ballentine et al. 2004) (Strote & Nowicki 1996)
(Catchpole et al. 1984) (Searcy 1984) (Krebs et al. 1978) (Beecher et al. 2000)
Developmental stress Endocrine state
(Nottebohm et al. 1981) (Kroodsma & Canady 1985) (Brenowitz et al. 1995) (Sz ekely et al. 1996) (MacDougall-Shackleton et al. 1998) (Airey et al. 2000a) (Nowicki et al. 2002) (Johnson & Bottjer 1993)
TAFT
Song rate
Higher rate is correlated with: early arrival territory quality early pairing date
female fertility
increase in paternity
(Arvidsson & Neergaard 1991) (Nystrom 1997) (Alatalo et al. 1990) (Hofstad et al. 2002) (Mace 1987) (Pinxten & Eens 1998) (Moller et al. 1998)
Playback of high song rate induces more female display
Developmental stress Performance capacities
(Oberweger & Goller 2001) (Ward et al. 2003) (Thomas 1999) (Lucas et al. 1999) (Thomas & Cuthill 2002) (Moller 1991a) (Duffy & Ball 2002) (Nowicki & Ball 1989) (Wingeld & Hahn 1994) (Hunt et al. 1997) (Buchanan et al. 2003)
Trill performance
Trills with more rapid rates induce more female display
Wider frequency bandwidths induce more female display
Trade-offs with stereotypy Vocal tract function
(Hartley & Suthers 1989) (Podos 1996, 1997, 2001) (Podos et al. 1999, 2004a) (Westneat et al. 1993) (Lambrechts 1997) (Nowicki 1987) (Hoese et al. 2000) (Beckers et al. 2003)
Pure-tonal structure
Pure-tonal songs elicit stronger male territorial responses
71
defense (Hiebert et al. 1989, Balsby & Dabelsteen 2001; but see Beecher et al. 2000). Recent studies have focused on the hypothesis that repertoire size provides an honest indicator of male quality. In sedge warblers (Acrocephalus schoenobaenus), repertoire size was found to correlate positively with parental effort (Buchanan & Catchpole 2000). In a comparative analysis, immune responses were found to be more robust in species with large repertoire sizes, which implies an arms race between virulent pathogens and signaling males (Garamszegi et al. 2003). Moreover, studies of several species have found positive correlations between repertoire size and both offspring viability (Gil & Slater 2000) and lifetime reproductive success (McGregor et al. 1981, Hasselquist 1998). A males ability to invest in brain tissue appears to be the primary physiological mechanism that links repertoire size to male quality. Neurobiological studies have shown consistent correlations between repertoire size and the structure and size of two telencephalic nuclei, RA and HVc (Brenowitz 1997). RA is part of the song production pathway, and HVc is part of both the song production and the song memorization pathway. Comparative studies between individuals (Nottebohm et al. 1981), populations (Kroodsma & Canady 1985), species (Devoogd et al. 1993), and genera (Sz ekely et al. 1996) have documented positive correlations between brain nucleus size and repertoire size. HVc has recently been shown to have a strong heritable component (Ward et al. 1998, Airey et al. 2000b, Williams et al. 2003), a nding which supports a possible role for sexual selection on repertoire size. The size of brain nuclei can be regarded as a primary constraint on repertoire size. Various factors may secondarily limit repertoire size through their effects on brain nuclei. One such constraint is developmental stress (Nowicki et al. 2002). Brain tissue is costly to produce and maintain, and perhaps only high-quality individuals can meet the neurological demands imposed by a large song repertoire. These costs may be highest during development, when the song nuclei are growing rapidly in size and synaptic complexity. To illustrate, starlings subjected to nutritional stress during development sang shorter songs and fewer types of songs than their unstressed counterparts (Buchanan et al. 2003). The most direct evidence on this point to date is provided by Nowicki et al. (2002), who demonstrated that swamp sparrows reared under conditions of nutritional stress developed HVc nuclei of comparatively low volume. Endocrine state also exerts an important inuence on song nucleus development. Injections of the stress hormone corticosterone led to reduced motif repertoire sizes in zebra nches (Spencer et al. 2003). In canaries, testosterone regulates HVc size in males (Johnson & Bottjer 1993) and can promote HVc growth in females (Nottebohm 1980, Rasika et al. 1994). Tramontin et al. (2003) showed that HVc volume increased in birds implanted with testosterone, 5 -dihydrotestosterone, or estradiol, although the effect of the hormone treatments on singing behavior was less clear. These lines of evidence together support the hypothesis that the development and expression of repertoire size reects birds nutritional history and hormonal state (Nowicki et al. 1998).
72
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
High heritability in how well birds respond to developmental stress would enable repertoire size to serve as an accurate indicator of male genetic quality (Andersson 1994).
Song Rate
Song rate refers to the amount of song a bird produces per unit of time. Individual males often vary in their song rate, and females may use this variation as a basis for mate choice. Males that arrive earlier on breeding territories, that have higher quality territories, and that pair earlier tend to sing at relatively high rates (Alatalo et al. 1990, Arvidsson & Neergaard 1991, Nystrom 1997). Nystrom (1997) notes that earlier pairing may be the result of female preferences for high-quality territory rather than high song rate per se, and, thus, these two variables may be difcult to separate. In laboratory studies, females performed more copulation solicitation displays to song stimuli presented at high rates compared with song stimuli presented at low rates (Wasserman & Cigliano 1991, Collins et al. 1994, Balzer & Williams 1998). Field studies indicate that males sometimes adjust their song rate during the breeding season to match periods of female fertility (Moller 1991b; but see Gil et al. 1999). In some species, song rate peaks during maximum female fertility, just before or during egg laying (Mace 1987, Pinxten & Eens 1998). Male barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) with high song rates were shown to have higher rates of within-brood paternity (Moller et al. 1998). Several hypotheses address the mechanistic bases of song rate. Song rate is most commonly attributed to metabolic condition. Prestwich (1994) reports that the metabolic rate of signaling in insects and anurans can be up to 21 times resting metabolic rate. Recent studies of oxygen consumption in singing zebra nches, canaries, and starlings, however, suggest that bird song production imposes comparatively modest costs [maximum 2.4 times increase in metabolic rate (Oberweger & Goller 2001, Ward et al. 2003; but see Eberhardt 1994)]. Yet, several indirect lines of evidence point to high metabolic costs in bird song production. Thomas (2002) found that fat stores in nightingales dropped considerably during nighttime singing bouts. For daytime singers, low nighttime temperatures (and correspondingly high overnight metabolic expenditures) were correlated with low song rates at dawn (Thomas & Cuthill 2002). When the diets of birds were supplemented both in the eld and in the laboratory, the song rate of males increased, although this increase may be more a result of reduced time required for foraging than reduced energetic constraints (Nystrom 1997, Lucas et al. 1999, Thomas 1999). Song rate may serve as an honest indicator of male immunocompetence. Duffy & Ball (2002) found that starlings with high song rates had enhanced immune function (but see Birkhead et al. 1998, Buchanan et al. 1999). Two additional mechanistic inuences on song rate have received recent support: endocrine state and developmental stress. Testosterone plays an important role mediating seasonal changes in behavior, and during the breeding season, testosterone production and song rate increase together. Correlations between
73
testosterone levels and song rate were also found in laboratory studies in which males were implanted with testosterone (Nowicki & Ball 1989, Wingeld & Hahn 1994, Hunt et al. 1997). However, song rate can be high even when testosterone levels are low. In the song sparrow, song rates tend to increase in the fall while testosterone levels remain low (Logan & Wingeld 1990; see also Hau et al. 2000). Both testosterone and corticosterone inuence the development of brain song nuclei (Ball et al. 2002), and corticosterone is produced as a response to stress (Buchanan 2000). Stress during development may have long-term effects on song rate. Buchanan et al. (2003) found that young starlings that were subject to nutritional stresses during development showed decreased song rates. Their study also provided evidence for a positive relationship between all three mechanistic factors discussed here; metabolic condition, immune function, and song rate were all impacted by developmental stress.
Trill Performance
Many bird songs include sequences in which syllables are repeated in trills (Figure 1). Fast trills are expected to be comparatively difcult to produce because they demand higher levels of vocal performance that include more rapid respiration and vocal tract movements (Hartley & Suthers 1989, Westneat et al. 1993, Podos & Nowicki 2004, Zollinger & Suthers 2004). Direct evidence that trill rates are limited by vocal performance is provided by two studies in which young swamp sparrows were reared with training models in which trill rates were articially increased (Podos 1996, Podos et al. 2004a). Young birds in these studies were unable to produce accurate copies of rapid models and instead reproduced these models with reduced trill rates, note omissions, or pauses between syllables. Thus, selection for rapid trill rates in this species should be countered by motor limits on trill rate production (Podos 1996, see also Zollinger & Suthers 2004). The occurrence of trade-offs between trill rate and other vocal features provides additional evidence of performance limits on trill production (Lambrechts 1996, Podos & Nowicki 2004). In great tits (Parus major), note frequency shows lower levels of stereotypy in faster trills (Lambrechts 1997). Another vocal feature that expresses a trade-off with trill rate is frequency bandwidth, dened as the range of frequencies expressed in songs (Figure 3A) (Podos 1997, Draganoiu et al. 2002, Ballentine et al. 2004). This trade-off is consistent with a hypothesis of performance constraints (Figure 3B) (Podos & Nowicki 2004). Activity of the peripheral vocal apparatus has been observed to correspond to frequency bandwidth values. In swamp sparrows, high bandwidth trills are accompanied by relatively broad changes in beak gape (Westneat et al. 1993). These changes allow birds to adjust vocal tract resonances and maintain pure-tonal song structure across shifting song frequencies (Nowicki 1987, Hoese et al. 2000). As trilled song sequences evolve, increases in frequency bandwidth should constrain the evolution of trill rate because of a trade-off between rates and magnitudes of possible vocal tract modulations (Figure 3B) (Podos 1997). This hypothesis is further supported by a study of Darwins nches in which birds with relatively large beaks were shown to
74
PODOS HUBER TAFT
75
produce songs with comparatively low trill rates and frequency bandwidths (Podos 2001). In three laboratory studies, playback of songs with more rapid trill rates elicited more elaborate or frequent copulation solicitation displays from females (Vallet & Kreutzer 1995, Vallet et al. 1998, Draganoiu et al. 2002). A fourth study failed to detect a difference in female responses to playback of control versus rapid trills (Nowicki et al. 2001). Ballentine et al. (2004) provide evidence that both frequency bandwidth and trill rate are subject to sexual selection. They presented female swamp sparrows with pairs of songs that differed only in their deviation from a performance boundary dened by natural variation in trill structure. Birds displayed more often to songs with faster trill rates and wider bandwidths, that is, songs that reected greater levels of production difculty.
Pure-Tonal Structure
Songbird vocalizations are notable for their pure-tonal quality, which means that acoustic frequencies at any given moment tend to be concentrated within a narrow range (Marler 1969). The production of pure-tonal songs appears to be enabled by the function of a vocal tract resonance lter that attenuates acoustic overtones (see section above, Mechanisms). Many bird songs include dynamic changes in fundamental frequencies. Birds maintain the pure-tonal structure of songs that vary in frequency by means of precise and often rapid adjustments to vocal tract volume such as through changes in beak gape (Westneat et al. 1993, Podos et al. 2004b). A recent study demonstrated that a loss of precision in beak gape adjustments leads to reductions in songs pure-tonal quality (Hoese et al. 2000). Strote & Nowicki (1996) tested the inuence of pure-tonal quality on the responses of males to simulated territorial intrusion. They presented birds with two Figure 3 Trill rates and frequency bandwidths can be used to depict the acoustic space that vocal trills occupy. (A) Plot of trill rate and frequency bandwidth for trilled components of 740 song types of 34 species from the family Emberizidae. Triangular distributions are also evident for individual species and genera and support the vocal tract constraint hypothesis (Podos 1997). (B) Songs produced with low trill rates and limited frequency bandwidth (lower left spectrogram) require minimal vocal tract movements and, therefore, should be easily produced. As songs increase in either frequency bandwidth (upper left spectrogram) or trill rate (lower right spectrogram), the demands required of vocal performance are elevated. Increases in bandwidth require wider gapes, and increases in trill rates require greater rates of beak opening and closing. The physical challenge of producing songs with faster trill rates or broader frequency bandwidths should increase steadily, as indicated here by the light-dark gradient, until a performance limit is reached. Songs beyond this boundary (upper right spectrogram) cannot be produced, because they would require vocal tract movements exceeding birds performance capabilities (Podos & Nowicki 2004).
76
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
categories of song: control songs and songs recorded from birds singing in a helium-oxygen atmosphere in which harmonic overtones were expressed. Reduced responses to experimental songs suggest that sexual selection favors males who are able successfully to adjust vocal tract resonance properties in coordination with syrinx activity.
Other Traits?
Numerous other traits met only one of our two criteria and were, therefore, not included in Table 1. Song frequency has a clear mechanistic link to syrinx size, although we know of no evidence demonstrating that frequency is inuenced by sexual selection. Measures of song versatility, such as rates of song-type switching, have been identied as correlates of mating success and thus may be subject to sexual selection (e.g., Lampe & Espmark 1994). Lambrechts & Dhondt (1988) hypothesized that rapid song-type switching allows birds to minimize exhaustion and, thereby, presumably maintain a higher song rate, although we know of no empirical evidence that supports this hypothesis. A study by Forstmeier et al. (2002) suggests that sexual selection may drive increases in song amplitude. Although the mechanistic basis of song amplitude seems clearlouder sounds should require more metabolic outputwe know of no data that directly support this link. All song traits discussed so far can be measured directly from birds repertoires. Another relevant trait, copying accuracy, requires information about model songs and is, therefore, operationally more difcult to characterize. Copying accuracy is often discussed as being favored by natural selection, with local song dialects pointing to genetically coadapted populations (Baker & Cunningham 1985). Local dialect production may also serve as an honest indicator of male quality and, thus, may be subject to sexual selection (Rothstein & Fleischer 1987). Searcy et al. (2002) hypothesize that the accurate reproduction of local models honestly reects a males success in developing the neural mechanisms required for song learning.
CONCLUSIONS
Bird song has been a popular model system in animal behavior in part because it well illustrates the complementary inuences of genetics and learning in phenotype development. Drawing a distinction between genes and environment in vocal ontogeny has been criticized on conceptual grounds (e.g., Johnston 1988) but is supported by empirical evidence (Marler & Sherman 1985, Searcy 1988, Baptista 1996). For evolutionary analyses, we suggest that focusing on another distinction, between memes and vocal mechanisms as substrates of song evolution, is more useful. Memes can evolve as a result of genetic changes (e.g., innate perceptual predispositions) and as a result of learning (e.g., song copying), whereas mechanistic evolution only occurs through genetic modications (e.g., in syrinx
77
mass).1 The idea of mechanistic limits on song evolution concords with broader concepts of performance as a determinant of the relationship between patterns of morphological and behavioral evolution (Garland & Losos 1994). Throughout this essay, we have regarded vocal mechanisms as a constraining factor in song evolution. A number of recent studies suggest that vocal mechanisms can also provide creative opportunities in song evolution, especially under pressure from meme evolution (e.g., Figure 2D). We end with three examples: 1. Fitch (1999) provides evidence that the evolution of exaggerated trachea length in numerous bird groups, including cranes, swans, and geese, has enabled these birds to reduce the formant frequency dispersion of their calls, a vocal trait that normally provides an honest cue of body size. Morphological plasticity under the pressure of sexual selection allowed these birds to evolve elongated trachea and novel call properties. 2. White-crowned sparrows normally only copy acoustic models that begin with whistled components, and these birds are, thus, normally constrained to copy species-specic models. Soha & Marler (2000) demonstrated, however, that birds will freely copy heterospecic vocal material (even ground squirrel alarm calls!) if positioned after an introductory whistle. Therefore, perceptual rules that normally constrain song learning can provide a means for integrating novel vocal components into birds song repertoires. 3. Mechanistic constraints expressed during song ontogeny may physically drive the expression of novel song features. Young swamp sparrows trained with rapid models were observed to recongure some of these models with a novel species-atypical syntax, presumably to ensure the accurate reproduction of other song model features (Podos 1996; Podos et al. 1999, 2004a). Given these and similar studies, we conclude by suggesting that mechanistic constraints examined in this review not only act as a barrier to song evolution but also may work in tandem with meme evolution as a creative force in the evolution of bird songs. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We gratefully acknowledge Barbara Ballentine, Bruce Byers, Don Kroodsma, Stephen Nowicki, Jordan Price, Michael Ryan, William Searcy, and Heather Williams for critical and thought-provoking feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript. Funding was provided by National Science Foundation grant IBN 0347291 to J.P.
1
We do not, of course, mean to imply that purely genetic traits evolve in the absence of environmental information. All traits are subject to such information during development, for example, as encompassed in the concept of the norm of reaction. Rather, we mean that the intergenerational transmission of mechanisms of vocal production is not inuenced by the experiences of individual birds.
78
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT
The Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics is online at http://ecolsys.annualreviews.org
LITERATURE CITED
Airey DC, Buchanan KL, Sz ekely T, Catchpole CK, DeVoogd TJ. 2000a. Song, sexual selection, and a song control nucleus (HVc) in the brains of European sedge warblers. J. Neurobiol. 44:16 Airey DC, Castillo-Juarez H, Casella G, Pollak EJ, DeVoogd TJ. 2000b. Variation in the volume of zebra nch song control nuclei is heritable: developmental and evolutionary implications. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 267:2099104 Alatalo RV, Glynn C, Lundberg A. 1990. Singing rate and female attraction in the pied ycatcher: an experiment. Anim. Behav. 39:6013 Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. 599 pp. Arnold AP. 1990. The passerine bird song system as a model in neuroendocrine research. J. Exp. Zool. S4:2230 Arnold SJ. 1992. Constraints on phenotypic evolution. Am. Nat. 140:S85107 Arvidsson BL, Neergaard R. 1991. Mate choice in the willow warbler: a eld experiment. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29:22529 Baker MC. 1996. Female buntings from hybridizing populations prefer conspecic males. Wilson Bull. 108:77175 Baker MC, Baker MSA, Baker EM. 2003. Rapid evolution of a novel song and an increase in repertoire size in an island population of an Australian songbird. Ibis 145:465 71 Baker MC, Bjerke TK, Lampe HM, Espmark YO. 1987. Sexual response of female yellowhammers to differences in regional song dialects and repertoire sizes. Anim. Behav. 35:395401 Baker MC, Cunningham MA. 1985. The biology of bird-song dialects. Behav. Brain Sci. 8:85133 Ball GF, Riters LV, Balthazart J. 2002. Neuroendocrinology of song behavior and avian brain plasticity: multiple sites of action of sex steroid hormones. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 23:13778 Ballentine B, Hyman J, Nowicki S. 2004. Vocal performance inuences female response to male bird song: an experimental test. Behav. Ecol. 15:16368 Balsby TJS, Dabelsteen T. 2001. The meaning of song repertoire size and song length to male whitethroats Sylvia communis. Behav. Process. 56:7584 Balzer AL, Williams TD. 1998. Do female zebra nches vary primary reproductive effort in relation to mate attractiveness? Behaviour 135:297309 Baptista LF. 1975. Song dialects and demes in sedentary populations of the white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli). Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 105:152 Baptista LF. 1996. Nature and its nurturing in avian vocal development. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 3960 Baptista LF, Kroodsma DE. 2001. Avian bioacoustics: a tribute to Luis Baptista. In Handbook of the Birds of the World, Vol. 6, Mousebirds to Hornbills. ed. J del Hoyo, A Elliott, J Sargatal, pp. 1052. Barcelona: Lynx Ed. Baptista LF, Petrinovich L. 1984. Social interaction, sensitive phases and the song template hypothesis in the white-crowned sparrow. Anim. Behav. 32:17281 Basolo AL. 1990. Female preference predates the evolution of the sword in swordtail sh. Science 250:80810 Becker PH. 1982. The coding of speciesspecic characteristics in bird sounds. See Kroodsma & Miller 1982, pp. 21352 Beckers GJL, Suthers RA, Ten Cate C. 2003. Pure-tone birdsong by resonance ltering of harmonic overtones. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:737276
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM Beecher MD. 1996. Birdsong learning in the laboratory and eld. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 6178 Beecher MD, Campbell SE, Nordby JC. 2000. Territory tenure in song sparrows is related to song sharing with neighbours, but not to repertoire size. Anim. Behav. 59:2937 Beecher MD, Stoddard PK, Campbell SE, Horning CL. 1996. Repertoire matching between neighbouring song sparrows. Anim. Behav. 51:91723 Bertelli S, Tubaro PL. 2002. Body mass and habitat correlates of song structure in a primitive group of birds. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 77:423 30 Birkhead TR, Fletcher F, Pellatt EJ. 1998. Sexual selection in the zebra nch Taeniopygia guttata: condition, sex traits and immune capacity. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 44:17991 Bitterbaum E, Baptista LF. 1979. Geographical variation in songs of California house nches (Carpodacus mexicanus). Auk 96:46274 Bonner JT. 1980. The Evolution of Culture in Animals. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. 232 pp. Bottjer SW, Miesner EA, Arnold AP. 1984. Forebrain lesions disrupt development but not maintenance of song in passerine birds. Science 224:9013 Boyd R, Richerson PJ. 1985. Culture and the Evolutionary Process. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press. 332 pp. Brainard MS, Doupe AJ. 2002. What songbirds teach us about learning. Nature 417:35158 Br emond JC. 1976. Specic recognition in the song of Bonellis warbler (Phylloscopus bonelli). Behaviour 58:99116 Brenowitz EA. 1997. Comparative approaches to the avian song system. J. Neurobiol. 33: 51731 Brenowitz EA, Arnold AP, Levin RN. 1985. Neural correlates of female song in tropical duetting birds. Brain Res. 343:10412 Brenowitz EA, Lent K, Kroodsma DE. 1995. Brain space for learned song in birds develops independently of song learning. J. Neurosci. 15:628186 Brown TJ, Handford P. 2000. Sound design for
79
vocalizations: quality in the woods, consistency in the elds. Condor 102:8192 Buchanan KL. 2000. Stress and the evolution of condition-dependent signals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15:15660 Buchanan KL, Catchpole CK. 1997. Female choice in the sedge warbler, Acrocephalus schoenobaenus: multiple cues from song and territory quality. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 264:52126 Buchanan KL, Catchpole CK. 2000. Song as an indicator of male parental effort in the sedge warbler. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B. 267:32126 Buchanan KL, Catchpole CK, Lewis JW, Lodge A. 1999. Song as an indicator of parasitism in the sedge warbler. Anim. Behav. 57:30714 Buchanan KL, Spencer KA, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2003. Song as an honest signal of past developmental stress in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 270:114956 Butlin RK, Ritchie MG. 1994. Behavior and speciation. In Behavior and Evolution, ed. PJB Slater, TR Halliday, pp. 4379. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press Byers BE. 1996. Messages encoded in the songs of chestnut-sided warblers. Anim. Behav. 52:691705 Catchpole CK. 1980. Sexual selection and the evolution of complex songs among European warblers of the genus Acrocephalus. Behaviour 74:14966 Catchpole CK. 2000. Sexual selection and the evolution of song and brain structure in Acrocephalus warblers. In Advances in the Study of Behavior, ed. PJB Slater, JS Rosenblatt, CT Snowden, TJ Roper, 29:4597. San Diego: Academic Catchpole CK, Dittami J, Leisler B. 1984. Differential responses to male song repertoires in female songbirds implanted with oestradiol. Nature 312:56364 Catchpole CK, Leisler B, Dittami J. 1986. Sexual differences in the responses of captive great reed warblers (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) to variation in song structure and repertoire size. Ethology 73:6977
80
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT munocompetence in male European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 269:84752 Eberhardt LS. 1994. Oxygen consumption during singing by male Carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Auk 111:124 30 Eens M, Pinxten R, Verheyen RF. 1991. Male song as a cue for mate choice in the European starling. Behaviour 116:21038 Espmark Y. 1999. Song of the snow bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis) in areas with and without sympatric passerines. Can. J. Zool. Rev. Can. Zool. 77:138592 Fisher RA. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon. 272 pp. Fitch WT. 1999. Acoustic exaggeration of size in birds via tracheal elongation: comparative and theoretical analyses. J. Zool. 248:3148 Forstmeier W, Kempenaers B, Meyer A, Leisler B. 2002. A novel song parameter correlates with extra-pair paternity and reects male longevity. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 269:147985 Garamszegi LZ, Moller AP, Erritzoe J. 2003. The evolution of immune defense and song complexity in birds. Evolution 57:90512 Garland T Jr, Losos JB. 1994. Ecological morphology of locomotor performance in squamate reptiles. In Ecological Morphology: Integrative Organismal Biology, ed. PC Wainwright, SM Reilly, pp. 240302. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press Gil D, Gahr M. 2002. The honesty of bird song: multiple constraints for multiple traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:13341 Gil D, Graves JA, Slater PJB. 1999. Seasonal patterns of singing in the willow warbler: evidence against the fertility announcement hypothesis. Anim. Behav. 58:9951000 Gil D, Slater PJB. 2000. Song organisation and singing patterns of the willow warbler, Phylloscopus trochilus. Behaviour 137:75982 Goller F, Daley MA. 2001. Novel motor gestures for phonation during inspiration enhance the acoustic complexity of birdsong. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 268:23015 Goller F, Larsen ON. 1997. A new mechanism
Catchpole CK, Slater PJB. 1995. Bird Song: Biological Themes and Variations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press. 248 pp. Cavalli-Sforza LL, Feldman MW. 1981. Cultural Transmission and Evolution: A Quantitative Approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press. 388 pp. Cicero C, Benowitz-Fredericks ZM. 2000. Song types and variation in insular populations of Lincolns sparrow (Melospiza lincolnii), and comparisons with other Melospiza. Auk 117:5264 Clark CW, Marler P, Beeman K. 1987. Quantitative analysis of animal vocal phonology: an application to swamp sparrow song. Ethology 76:10115 Collins SA, Hubbard C, Houtman AM. 1994. Female mate choice in the zebra nch: the effect of male beak color and male song. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35:2125 Cutler B. 1970. Anatomical Studies of the Syrinx of Darwins Finches. San Francisco, CA: San Francisco State Univ. 272 pp. Darwin C. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray Dawkins R. 1976. The Selsh Gene. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 224 pp. De Kort SR, Ten Cate C. 2001. Response to interspecic vocalizations is affected by degree of phylogenetic relatedness in Streptopelia doves. Anim. Behav. 61:23947 Devoogd TJ, Krebs JR, Healy SD, Purvis A. 1993. Relations between song repertoire size and the volume of brain nuclei related to song: comparative evolutionary analyses amongst oscine birds. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 254:7582 Doutrelant C, Leitao A, Giorgi H, Lambrechts MM. 1999. Geographical variation in blue tit song, the result of an adjustment to vegetation type? Behaviour 136:48193 Draganoiu TI, Nagle L, Kreutzer M. 2002. Directional female preference for an exaggerated male trait in canary (Serinus canaria) song. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 269:2525 31 Duffy DL, Ball GF. 2002. Song predicts im-
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM of sound generation in songbirds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:1478791 Gould SJ. 1980. The evolutionary biology of constraint. Daedalus 109:3952 Grafen A. 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. J. Theor. Biol. 144:517546 Grant BR, Grant PR. 1996. Cultural inheritance of song and its role in the evolution of Darwins nches. Evolution 50:247187 Grant BR, Grant PR. 2002. Simulating secondary contact in allopatric speciation: an empirical test of premating isolation. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 76:54556 Grant PR, Grant BR. 1992. Hybridization of bird species. Science 256:19397 Grant PR, Grant BR. 1997. Hybridization, sexual imprinting, and mate choice. Am. Nat. 149:128 Grant PR, Grant BR. 2002. Adaptive radiation of Darwins nches. Am. Sci. 90:13039 Gray DA, Hagelin JC. 1996. Song repertoires and sensory exploitation: reconsidering the case of the common grackle. Anim. Behav. 52:795800 Greenewalt CH. 1968. Bird Song: Acoustics and Physiology. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Inst. Press. 194 pp. Hahnloser RHR, Kozhevnikov AA, Fee MS. 2002. An ultra-sparse code underlies the generation of neural sequences in a songbird. Nature 419:6570 Hamilton WD, Zuk M. 1982. Heritable true tness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science 218:38487 Handford P, Lougheed SC. 1991. Variation in duration and frequency characters in the song of the Rufous-collared sparrow, Zonotrichia capensis, with respect to habitat, trill dialects and body size. Condor 93:64458 Hansen P. 1979. Vocal learning: its role in adapting sound structures to long-distance propagation and a hypothesis on its evolution. Anim. Behav. 27:127071 Hartley RS, Suthers RA. 1989. Airow and pressure during canary song: direct evidence for mini-breaths. J. Comp. Physiol. A 165: 1526 Hasselquist D. 1998. Polygyny in great reed
81
warblers: a long-term study of factors contributing to male tness. Ecology 79:2376 90 Hasselquist D, Bensch S, von Schantz T. 1996. Correlation between male song repertoire, extra-pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler. Nature 381:22932 Hau M, Wikelski M, Soma KK, Wingeld JC. 2000. Testosterone and year-round territorial aggression in a tropical bird. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 117:2033 Herrel A, OReilly JC, Richmond AM. 2002. Evolution of bite performance in turtles. J. Evol. Biol. 15:108394 Heyes CM. 1994. Social learning in animals: categories and mechanisms. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 69:20731 Hiebert SM, Stoddard PK, Arcese P. 1989. Repertoire size, territory acquisition and reproductive success in the song sparrow. Anim. Behav. 37:26673 Hoese WJ, Podos J, Boetticher NC, Nowicki S. 2000. Vocal tract function in birdsong production: experimental manipulation of beak movements. J. Exp. Biol. 203:184555 Hofstad E, Espmark Y, Moksnes A, Haugan T, Ingebrigtsen M. 2002. The relationship between song performance and male quality in snow buntings (Plectrophenax nivalis). Can. J. Zool. Rev. Can. Zool. 80:52431 Holland B, Rice WR. 1998. Perspective: chaseaway sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution 52:17 Horn AG, Dickinson TE, Falls JB. 1993. Male quality and song repertoires in western meadowlarks (Sturnella neglecta). Can. J. Zool. Rev. Can. Zool. 71:105961 Hunt KE, Hahn TP, Wingeld JC. 1997. Testosterone implants increase song but not aggression in male Lapland longspurs. Anim. Behav. 54:117792 Hunter ML, Krebs JR. 1979. Geographical variation in the song of the great tit (Parus major) in relation to ecological factors. J. Anim. Ecol. 48:75985 Ince SA, Slater PJB, Weismann C. 1980. Changes with time in the songs of a population of chafnches. Condor 82:28590
82
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT in black-capped chickadee songs and singing behavior. Auk 116:387402 Kroodsma DE, Canady RA. 1985. Differences in repertoire size, singing behavior, and associated neuroanatomy among marsh wren populations have a genetic basis. Auk 102:43946 Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, eds. 1982. Acoustic Communication in Birds. New York: Academic Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, eds. 1996. Ecology and Evolution of Acoustic Communication in Birds. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press Kroodsma DE, Parker LD. 1977. Vocal virtuosity in the brown thrasher. Auk 94:78385 Kroodsma DE, Pickert R. 1980. Environmentally dependent sensitive periods for avian vocal learning. Nature 288:47779 Kroodsma DE, Woods RW, Goodwin EA. 2002. Falkland Island sedge wrens (Cistothorus platensis) imitate rather than improvise large song repertoires. Auk 119:52328 Lambrechts MM. 1996. Organization of birdsong and constraints on performance. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 30520 Lambrechts MM. 1997. Song frequency plasticity and composition of phrase versions in great tits Parus major. Ardea 85:99109 Lambrechts MM, Dhondt AA. 1988. The antiexhaustion hypothesis: a new hypothesis to explain song performance and song switching in the great tit. Anim. Behav. 36:32734 Lampe HM, Espmark YO. 1994. Song structure reects male quality in pied ycatchers, Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim. Behav. 47:869 76 Lampe HM, Espmark YO. 2003. Mate choice in pied ycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca: Can females use song to nd high-quality males and territories? Ibis 145:E2433 Larsen ON, Goller F. 1999. Role of syringeal vibrations in bird vocalizations. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 266:160915 Lemon RE. 1975. How birds develop song dialects. Condor 77:385406 Livingston FS, White SA, Mooney R. 2000. Slow NMDA-EPSCs at synapses critical for song development are not required for song
Irwin DE. 2000. Song variation in an avian ring species. Evolution 54:9981010 Irwin DE, Price T. 1999. Sexual imprinting, learning and speciation. Heredity 82:34754 Jenkins PF. 1978. Cultural transmission of song patterns and dialect development in a freeliving bird population. Anim. Behav. 26:50 78 Johnson F, Bottjer SW. 1993. Hormone-induced changes in identied cell populations of the higher vocal center in male canaries. J. Neurobiol. 24:40018 Johnston TD. 1988. Developmental explanation and the ontogeny of birdsong: nature/nurture redux. Behav. Brain Sci. 11:61729 Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ. 1991. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350:3338 Kodric-Brown A, Brown JH. 1984. Truth in advertising: the kinds of traits favored by sexual selection. Am. Nat. 124:30923 Konishi M. 1965. The role of auditory feedback in the control of vocalization in the whitecrowned sparrow. Z. Tierpsychol. 22:770 83 Konishi M. 1985. Birdsong: from behavior to neuron. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 8:12570 Kramer B. 1990. Electrocommunication in Teleost Fishes: Behavior and Experiments. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 240 pp. Krebs JR, Ashcroft R, Webber M. 1978. Song repertoires and territory defence in the great tit. Nature 271:53942 Kroodsma DE. 1977. Correlates of song organization among North American wrens. Am. Nat. 111:9951008 Kroodsma DE. 1982. Song repertoires: problems in their denition and use. See Kroodsma & Miller 1982, pp. 12546 Kroodsma DE. 1996. Ecology of passerine song development. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 319 Kroodsma DE. 2004. Diversity and plasticity of bird song. In Natures Music: The Science of Bird Song, ed. P Marler, H Slabbekoorn. New York: Academic. In press Kroodsma DE, Byers BE, Halkin SL, Hill C, Minis D, et al. 1999. Geographic variation
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM learning in zebra nches. Nat. Neurosci. 3: 48288 Logan CA, Wingeld JC. 1990. Autumnal territorial aggression is independent of plasma testosterone in mockingbirds. Horm. Behav. 24:56881 Lorenz KZ. 1950. The comparative method in studying innate behaviour patterns. Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol. 4:22168 Lucas JR, Schraeder A, Jackson C. 1999. Carolina chickadee (Aves, Paridae, Poecile carolinensis) vocalization rates: effects of body mass and food availability under aviary conditions. Ethology 105:50320 Lynch A. 1996. The population mimetics of birdsong. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 18197 MacDougall-Shackleton EA, MacDougallShackleton SA. 2001. Cultural and genetic evolution in mountain white-crowned sparrows: song dialects are associated with population structure. Evolution 55:2568 75 MacDougall-Shackleton SA, Hulse SH, Ball GF. 1998. Neural correlates of singing behavior in male zebra nches (Taeniopygia guttata). J. Neurobiol. 36:42130 Mace R. 1987. The dawn chorus in the great tit Parus major is directly related to female fertility. Nature 330:74546 Marler P. 1957. Specic distinctiveness in the communication signals of birds. Behaviour 11:1339 Marler P. 1960. Bird songs and mate selection. In Animal Sounds and Communication, ed. WE Lanyon, WN Tavolga, pp. 34867. Washington, DC: Am. Inst. Biol. Sci. Marler P. 1969. Tonal quality of bird sounds. In Bird Vocalizations, ed. RA Hinde, pp. 518. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press Marler P. 1976. Sensory templates in speciesspecic behavior. In Simpler Networks and Behavior, ed. J Fentress, pp. 31429. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Marler P. 1984. Song learning: innate species differences in the learning process. In The Biology of Learning, ed. P Marler, HS Terrace, pp. 289309. Berlin: Springer-Verlag
83
Marler P, Peters S. 1977. Selective vocal learning in a sparrow. Science 198:51921 Marler P, Peters S. 1982. Subsong and plastic song: their role in the vocal learning process. See Kroodsma & Miller 1982, pp. 2550 Marler P, Peters S. 1987. A sensitive period for song acquisition in the song sparrow, Melospiza melodia: a case of age-limited learning. Ethology 76:89100 Marler P, Peters S. 1988. The role of song phonology and syntax in vocal learning preferences in the song sparrow, Melospiza melodia. Ethology 77:12549 Marler P, Pickert R. 1984. Species-universal microstructure in the learned song of the swamp sparrow, Melospiza georgiana. Anim. Behav. 32:67389 Marler P, Sherman V. 1985. Innate differences in singing behavior of sparrows reared in isolation from adult conspecic song. Anim. Behav. 33:5771 Marler P, Tamura M. 1962. Song dialects in three populations of white-crowned sparrows. Condor 64:36877 Marler P, Tamura M. 1964. Culturally transmitted patterns of vocal behavior in sparrows. Science 146:148386 Marten K, Marler P. 1977. Sound transmission and its signicance for animal vocalization. I. Temperate habitats. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2:27190 Maynard Smith J, Burian R, Kauffman S, Alberch P, Campbell J, et al. 1985. Developmental constraints and evolution. Q. Rev. Biol. 60:26587 McCasland JS. 1987. Neuronal control of bird song production. J. Neurosci. 7:2339 McGregor PK, Krebs JR, Perrins CM. 1981. Song repertoires and lifetime reproductive success in the great tit (Parus major). Am. Nat. 118:14959 Moller AP. 1991a. Parasite load reduces song output in a passerine bird. Anim. Behav. 41: 72330 Moller AP. 1991b. Why mated songbirds sing so much: mate guarding and male announcement of mate fertility status. Am. Nat. 138:9941014
84
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT Nottebohm F, Kasparian S, Pandazis C. 1981. Brain space for a learned task. Brain Res. 213:99109 Nottebohm F, Nottebohm ME, Crane L. 1986. Developmental and seasonal changes in canary song and their relation to changes in the anatomy of song control nuclei. Behav. Neural Biol. 46:44571 Nottebohm F, Stokes TM, Leonard CM. 1976. Central control of song in the canary, Serinus canarius. J. Comp. Neurol. 165:45786 Nowicki S. 1987. Vocal-tract resonances in oscine bird sound production: evidence from birdsongs in a helium atmosphere. Nature 325:5355 Nowicki S, Ball GF. 1989. Testosterone induction of song in photosensitive and photorefractory male sparrows. Horm. Behav. 23: 51425 Nowicki S, Marler P. 1988. How do birds sing? Music Perception 5:391426 Nowicki S, Peters S, Podos J. 1998. Song learning, early nutrition and sexual selection in songbirds. Am. Zool. 38:17990 Nowicki S, Searcy WA, Hughes M, Podos J. 2001. The evolution of bird song: male and female response to song innovation in swamp sparrows. Anim. Behav. 62:118995 Nowicki S, Searcy WA, Peters S. 2002. Brain development, song learning and mate choice in birds: a review and experimental test of the nutritional stress hypothesis. J. Comp. Physiol. A 188:100314 Nowicki S, Westneat MW, Hoese WJ. 1992. Birdsong: motor function and the evolution of communication. Semin. Neurosci. 4:385 90 Nystrom KGK. 1997. Food density, song rate, and body condition in territory-establishing willow warblers (Phylloscopus trochilus). Can. J. Zool. Rev. Canad. Zool. 75:47 58 Oberweger K, Goller F. 2001. The metabolic cost of birdsong production. J. Exp. Biol. 204:337988 Payne K, Tyack P, Payne R. 1983. Progressive changes in the songs of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae): a detailed
Moller AP, Saino N, Taramino G, Galeotti P, Ferrario S. 1998. Paternity and multiple signaling: effects of a secondary sexual character and song on paternity in the barn swallow. Am. Nat. 151:236242 Morton ES. 1975. Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am. Nat. 109:1734 Morton ES. 1987. The effects of distance and isolation on song-type sharing in the Carolina wren. Wilson Bull. 99:60110 Mountjoy DJ, Lemon RE. 1996. Female choice for complex song in the European starling: a eld experiment. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38:6571 Naguib M, Todt D. 1998. Recognition of neighbors song in a species with large and complex song repertoires: the thrush nightingale. J. Avian Biol. 29:15560 Naugler CT, Ratcliffe L. 1994. Character release in bird song: a test of the acoustic competition hypothesis using American tree sparrows Spizella arborea. J. Avian Biol. 25:14248 Nelson DA. 2000. Song overproduction, selective attrition and song dialects in the whitecrowned sparrow. Anim. Behav. 60:88798 Nelson DA, Marler P. 1990. The perception of birdsong and an ecological concept of signal space. In Comparative Perception, Vol. 2, Complex Signals, ed. WC Stebbins, MA Berkley, pp. 44378. New York: Wiley Nelson DA, Marler P. 1993. Innate recognition of song in white-crowned sparrows: a role in selective vocal learning? Anim. Behav. 46:8068 Nelson DA, Marler P, Morton ML. 1996. Overproduction in song development: an evolutionary correlate with migration. Anim. Behav. 51:112740 Noad MJ, Cato DH, Bryden MM, Jenner MN, Jenner KCS. 2000. Cultural revolution in whale songs. Nature 408:537 Nottebohm F. 1980. Testosterone triggers growth of brain vocal control nuclei in adult female canaries. Brain Res. 189:42936 Nottebohm F, Arnold AP. 1976. Sexual dimorphism in vocal control areas of the songbird brain. Science 194:21113
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM analysis of two seasons in Hawaii. In Communication and Behavior of Whales, ed. R Payne, pp. 957. Boulder, CO: Westview Payne RB. 1986. Bird songs and avian systematics. Curr. Ornithol. 3:87126 Payne RB. 1996. Song traditions in indigo buntings: origin, improvisation, dispersal, and extinction in cultural evolution. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 198220 Perrin N, Travis J. 1992. On the use of constraints in evolutionary biology and some allergic reactions to them. Funct. Ecol. 6:361 63 Peters S, Searcy WA, Beecher MD, Nowicki S. 2000. Geographic variation in the organization of song sparrow repertoires. Auk 117:93642 Pinxten R, Eens M. 1998. Male starlings sing most in the late morning, following egglaying: A strategy to protect their paternity? Behaviour 135:1197211 Podos J. 1996. Motor constraints on vocal development in a songbird. Anim. Behav. 51: 106170 Podos J. 1997. A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes:Emberizidae). Evolution 51:53751 Podos J. 2001. Correlated evolution of morphology and vocal signal structure in Darwins nches. Nature 409:18588 Podos J, Nowicki S. 2004. Performance limits on birdsong. In Natures Music: The Science of Bird Song, ed. P Marler, H Slabbekoorn. New York: Academic. In press Podos J, Nowicki S, Peters S. 1999. Permissiveness in the learning and development of song syntax in swamp sparrows. Anim. Behav. 58:93103 Podos J, Peters S, Nowicki S. 2004a. Calibration of song learning targets during vocal ontogeny in swamp sparrows (Melospiza georgiana). Anim. Behav. In press Podos J, Sherer JK, Peters S, Nowicki S. 1995. Ontogeny of vocal tract movements during song production in song sparrows. Anim. Behav. 50:128796 Podos J, Southall JA, Rossi-Santos MR. 2004b.
85
Vocal mechanics in Darwins nches: correlation of beak gape and song frequency. J. Exp. Biol. 207:60719 Prestwich KN. 1994. The energetics of acoustic signaling in anurans and insects. Am. Zool. 34:62543 Price JJ, Lanyon SM. 2002. Reconstructing the evolution of complex bird song in the oropendolas. Evolution 56:151429 Price JJ, Lanyon SM. 2004. Patterns of song evolution and sexual selection in the oropendolas and caciques. Behav. Ecol. 15:48597 Proctor HC. 1991. Courtship in the water mite Neumania papillator: males capitalize on female adaptations for predation. Anim. Behav. 42:58998 Prum RO. 1990. Phylogenetic analysis of the evolution of display behavior in the Neotropical manakins (Aves, Pipridae). Ethology 84:20231 Ptacek MB. 2000. The role of mating preferences in shaping interspecic divergence in mating signals in vertebrates. Behav. Process. 51:11134 Rasika S, Nottebohm F, Alvarez-Buylla A. 1994. Testosterone increases the recruitment and/or survival of new high vocal center neurons in adult female canaries. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:785458 Richards DG, Wiley RH. 1980. Reverberations and amplitude uctuations in the propagation of sound in a forest: implications for animal communication. Am. Nat. 115:38199 Rome LC, Syme DA, Hollingworth S, Lindstedt SL, Baylor SM. 1996. The whistle and the rattle: the design of sound producing muscles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:8095100 Rothstein SI, Fleischer RC. 1987. Vocal dialects and their possible relation to honest signalling in the brown-headed cowbird. Condor 89:123 Ryan MJ. 1990. Sexual selection, sensory systems, and sensory exploitation. Oxford Surv. Evol. Biol. 7:15695 Ryan MJ, Brenowitz EA. 1985. The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song. Am. Nat. 126:87 100
86
PODOS
HUBER
TAFT tion pressures on acoustic signals. Evolution 56:184958 Slater PJB. 1986. The cultural transmission of bird song. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1:9497 Slater PJB. 1989. Bird song learning: causes and consequences. Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 1:19 46 Slater PJB, Eales LA, Clayton NS. 1988. Song learning in zebra nches (Taeniopygia guttata): progress and prospects. Adv. Stud. Behav. 18:134 Soha JA, Marler P. 2000. A species-specic acoustic cue for selective song learning in the white-crowned sparrow. Anim. Behav. 60:297306 Spector DA. 1992. Wood-warbler song systems: a review of paruline singing behaviors. In Current Ornithology, ed. DM Power, 9:199238. New York: Plenum Spencer KA, Buchanan KL, Goldsmith AR, Catchpole CK. 2003. Song as an honest signal of developmental stress in the zebra nch (Taeniopygia guttata). Horm. Behav. 44:13239 Strote J, Nowicki S. 1996. Responses to songs with altered tonal quality by adult song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Behaviour 133:16172 Suthers RA. 1997. Peripheral control and lateralization of birdsong. J. Neurobiol. 33:632 52 Suthers RA, Goller F. 1997. Motor correlates of vocal diversity in songbirds. In Current Ornithology, ed. V Nolan Jr, ED Ketterson, CF Thompson, pp. 23588. New York: Plenum Suthers RA, Goller F, Hartley RS. 1994. Motor dynamics of song production by mimic thrushes. J. Neurobiol. 25:91736 Suthers RA, Goller F, Pytte C. 1999. The neuromuscular control of birdsong. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B 354:92739 Sz ekely T, Catchpole CK, DeVoogd A, Marchl Z, DeVoogd TJ. 1996. Evolutionary changes in a song control area of the brain (HVC) are associated with evolutionary changes in song repertoire among European warblers (Sylviidae). Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 263:607 10
Ryan MJ, Keddy-Hector A. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. Am. Nat. 139:S435 Schluter D. 1996. Adaptive radiation along genetic lines of least resistance. Evolution 50: 176674 Searcy WA. 1992. Song repertoire and mate choice in birds. Am. Zool. 32:7180 Searcy WA. 1984. Song repertoire size and female preferences in song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14:28186 Searcy WA. 1988. Song development from evolutionary and ecological perspectives. Behav. Brain Sci. 11:64748 Searcy WA, Andersson M. 1986. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17:50733 Searcy WA, Nowicki S, Hughes M, Peters S. 2002. Geographic song discrimination in relation to dispersal distances in song sparrows. Am. Nat. 159:22130 Searcy WA, Yasukawa K. 1990. Use of the song repertoire in intersexual and intrasexual contexts by male red-winged blackbirds. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 27:12328 Searcy WA, Yasukawa K. 1996. Song and female choice. See Kroodsma & Miller 1996, pp. 45473 Simpson HB, Vicario DS. 1990. Brain pathways for learned and unlearned vocalizations differ in zebra nches. J. Neurosci. 10:1541 56 Slabbekoorn H, Jesse A, Bell DA. 2003. Microgeographic song variation in island populations of the white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys nutalli): innovation through recombination. Behaviour 140:947 63 Slabbekoorn H, Smith TB. 2000. Does bill size polymorphism affect courtship song characteristics in the African nch Pyrenestes ostrinus? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 71:73753 Slabbekoorn H, Smith TB. 2002a. Bird song, ecology and speciation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Ser. B 357:493503 Slabbekoorn H, Smith TB. 2002b. Habitatdependent song divergence in the little greenbul: an analysis of environmental selec-
BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM Ten Cate C, Slabbekoorn H, Ballintijn MR. 2002. Bird song and male-male competition: causes and consequences of vocal variability in the collared dove (Streptopelia decaocto). Adv. Stud. Behav. 31:3175 Thielcke G. 1972. On the origin of divergence of learned signals (songs) in isolated populations. Ibis 115:51116 Thomas RJ. 1999. The effect of variability in the food supply on the daily singing routines of European robins: a test of a stochastic dynamic programming model. Anim. Behav. 57:36569 Thomas RJ. 2002. The costs of singing in nightingales. Anim. Behav. 63:95966 Thomas RJ, Cuthill IC. 2002. Body mass regulation and the daily singing routines of European robins. Anim. Behav. 63:28592 Thorpe WH. 1961. Bird Song. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press. 143 pp. Tinbergen N. 1951. The Study of Instinct. Oxford: Clarendon. 228 pp. Tramontin AD, Wingeld JC, Brenowitz EA. 2003. Androgens and estrogens induce seasonal-like growth of song nuclei in the adult songbird brain. J. Neurobiol. 57:130 40 Vallet E, Beme I, Kreutzer M. 1998. Two-note syllables in canary songs elicit high levels of sexual display. Anim. Behav. 55:29197 Vallet E, Kreutzer M. 1995. Female canaries are sexually responsive to special song phrases. Anim. Behav. 49:160310 Vehrencamp SL. 2001. Is song-type matching a conventional signal of aggressive intentions? Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 268:1637 42 Wake DB. 1991. Homoplasy: the result of natural selection, or evidence of design limitations? Am. Nat. 138:54367 Wallschl ager D. 1980. Correlation of song frequency and body weight in passerine birds. Experientia 36:412
87
Ward BC, Nordeen EJ, Nordeen KW. 1998. Individual variation in neuron number predicts differences in the propensity for avian vocal imitation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:127782 Ward S, Speakman JR, Slater PJB. 2003. The energy cost of song in the canary, Serinus canaria. Anim. Behav. 66:893902 Wasserman FE, Cigliano JA. 1991. Song output and stimulation of the female in whitethroated sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29:5559 Westneat MW, Long JH Jr, Hoese W, Nowicki S. 1993. Kinematics of birdsong: functional correlation of cranial movements and acoustic features in sparrows. J. Exp. Biol. 182:14771 Wiley RH. 1991. Associations of song properties with habitats for territorial oscine birds of eastern North America. Am. Nat. 138:97393 Williams H, Connor DM, Hill JW. 2003. Testosterone decreases the potential for song plasticity in adult male zebra nches. Horm. Behav. 44:40212 Williams H, Mehta N. 1999. Changes in adult zebra nch song require a forebrain nucleus that is not necessary for song production. J. Neurobiol. 39:1428 Wingeld JC, Hahn TP. 1994. Testosterone and territorial behavior in sedentary and migratory sparrows. Anim. Behav. 47:7789 Yu AC, Margoliash D. 1996. Temporal hierarchical control of singing in birds. Science 273:187175 Zahavi A. 1975. Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53:20514 Zollinger SA, Suthers RA. 2004. Motor mechanisms of a vocal mimic: implications for birdsong production. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 271:48391 Zuk M, Kolluru GR. 1998. Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Q. Rev. Biol. 73:41538
Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics Volume 35, 2004
CONTENTS
VERTEBRATE DISPERSAL OF SEED PLANTS THROUGH TIME,
Bruce H. Tiffney
1 31 55 89
ARE DISEASES INCREASING IN THE OCEAN? Kevin D. Lafferty,

James W. Porter, and Susan E. Ford
BIRD SONG: THE INTERFACE OF EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM,

Jeffrey Podos, Sarah K. Huber, and Benjamin Taft
APPLICATION OF ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, Gerald J. Niemi

and Michael E. McDonald te , ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF DEER OVERABUNDANCE, Steeve D. Co Thomas P. Rooney, Jean-Pierre Tremblay, Christian Dussault, and Donald M. Waller 113
ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS AND THE ESCAPE OF TRANSGENES INTO WILD POPULATIONS, Diana Pilson
and Holly R. Prendeville 149
MUTUALISMS AND AQUATIC COMMUNITY STRUCTURE: THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY IS MY FRIEND, Mark E. Hay, John D. Parker,
Deron E. Burkepile, Christopher C. Caudill, Alan E. Wilson, Zachary P. Hallinan, and Alexander D. Chequer 175 199 229 257
OPERATIONAL CRITERIA FOR DELIMITING SPECIES, Jack W. Sites, Jr.,

and Jonathon C. Marshall
THE NEW VIEW OF ANIMAL PHYLOGENY, Kenneth M. Halanych LANDSCAPES AND RIVERSCAPES: THE INFLUENCE OF LAND USE ON STREAM ECOSYSTEMS, J. David Allan LONG-TERM STASIS IN ECOLOGICAL ASSEMBLAGES: EVIDENCE FROM THE FOSSIL RECORD, W.A. DiMichele, A.K. Behrensmeyer,
T.D. Olszewski, C.C. Labandeira, J.M. Pandol, S.L. Wing, and R. Bobe
285 323 347
AVIAN EXTINCTIONS FROM TROPICAL AND SUBTROPICAL FORESTS,

Navjot S. Sodhi, L.H. Liow, and F.A. Bazzaz
EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY OF ANIMAL COGNITION, Reuven Dukas POLLINATION SYNDROMES AND FLORAL SPECIALIZATION,
Charles B. Fenster, W. Scott Armbruster, Paul Wilson, Michele R. Dudash, and James D. Thomson
375 v
vi
CONTENTS
ON THE ECOLOGICAL ROLES OF SALAMANDERS, Robert D. Davic

and Hartwell H. Welsh, Jr. 405 435 467
ECOLOGICAL AND EVOLUTIONARY CONSEQUENCES OF MULTISPECIES PLANT-ANIMAL INTERACTIONS, Sharon Y. Strauss and Rebecca E. Irwin SPATIAL SYNCHRONY IN POPULATION DYNAMICS, Andrew Liebhold,
Walter D. Koenig, and Ottar N. Bjrnstad
ECOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO HABITAT EDGES: MECHANISMS, MODELS, AND VARIABILITY EXPLAINED, Leslie Ries,
Robert J. Fletcher, Jr., James Battin, and Thomas D. Sisk
491
EVOLUTIONARY TRAJECTORIES AND BIOGEOCHEMICAL IMPACTS OF MARINE EUKARYOTIC PHYTOPLANKTON, Miriam E. Katz,
Zoe V. Finkel, Daniel Grzebyk, Andrew H. Knoll, and Paul G. Falkowski 523
REGIME SHIFTS, RESILIENCE, AND BIODIVERSITY IN ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT, Carl Folke, Steve Carpenter, Brian Walker,
Marten Scheffer, Thomas Elmqvist, Lance Gunderson, and C.S. Holling 557 583
ECOLOGY OF WOODLAND HERBS IN TEMPERATE DECIDUOUS FORESTS,

Dennis F. Whigham
THE SOUTHWEST AUSTRALIAN FLORISTIC REGION: EVOLUTION AND CONSERVATION OF A GLOBAL HOT SPOT OF BIODIVERSITY,
Stephen D. Hopper and Paul Gioia 623 651 675
PREDATOR-INDUCED PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY IN ORGANISMS WITH COMPLEX LIFE HISTORIES, Michael F. Benard THE EVOLUTIONARY ECOLOGY OF NOVEL PLANT-PATHOGEN INTERACTIONS, Ingrid M. Parker and Gregory S. Gilbert INDEXES
Subject Index Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 3135 Cumulative Index of Chapter Titles, Volumes 3135
701 721 724
ERRATA
An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics chapters may be found at http://ecolsys.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml

Annurev Ecolsys 35 021103 105719

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Annurev Ecolsys 35 021103 105719

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2004. 35:5587 doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.021103.105719 Copyright c 2004 by Annual Reviews.

BIRD SONG: The Interface of Evolution

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

SUBSTRATES OF SONG EVOLUTION

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

CAUSES OF SONG EVOLUTION

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

SONG TRAIT EVOLUTION

Evidence for sexual selection

Developmental stress Endocrine state

Playback of high song rate induces more female display

Developmental stress Performance capacities

Trills with more rapid rates induce more female display

Wider frequency bandwidths induce more female display

Trade-offs with stereotypy Vocal tract function

Pure-tonal songs elicit stronger male territorial responses

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

BIRD SONG EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM

The Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics is online at http://ecolsys.annualreviews.org

Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics Volume 35, 2004

ARE DISEASES INCREASING IN THE OCEAN? Kevin D. Lafferty,

BIRD SONG: THE INTERFACE OF EVOLUTION AND MECHANISM,

APPLICATION OF ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, Gerald J. Niemi

OPERATIONAL CRITERIA FOR DELIMITING SPECIES, Jack W. Sites, Jr.,

285 323 347

AVIAN EXTINCTIONS FROM TROPICAL AND SUBTROPICAL FORESTS,

ON THE ECOLOGICAL ROLES OF SALAMANDERS, Robert D. Davic

ECOLOGY OF WOODLAND HERBS IN TEMPERATE DECIDUOUS FORESTS,

701 721 724

Вам также может понравиться