↓ Skip to main content

Acoustic ranging in poison frogs—it is not about signal amplitude alone

Overview of attention for article published in Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Acoustic ranging in poison frogs—it is not about signal amplitude alone
Published in
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00265-017-2340-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Max Ringler, Georgine Szipl, Walter Hödl, Leander Khil, Barbara Kofler, Michael Lonauer, Christina Provin, Eva Ringler

Abstract

Acoustic ranging allows identifying the distance of a sound source and mediates inter-individual spacing and aggression in territorial species. Birds and mammals are known to use more complex cues than only sound pressure level (SPL), which can be influenced by the signaller and signal transmission in non-predictable ways and thus is not reliable by itself. For frogs, only SPL is currently known to mediate inter-individual distances, but we hypothesise that the strong territoriality of Dendrobatids could make the use of complex cues for ranging highly beneficial for this family. Therefore, we tested the ranging abilities of territorial males of Allobates femoralis (Dendrobatidae, Aromobatinae) in playback trials, using amplitude-normalized signals that were naturally degraded over distance, and synthetic signals that were masked with different levels of noise. Frogs responded significantly less to signals recorded from larger distances, regardless of SPL and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), but showed no differential response to natural minimum and maximum SNRs across the typical communication range in wild populations. This indicates that frogs used signal amplitude and SNR only as ancillary cues when assessing the distance of sound sources and relied instead mainly on more complex cues, such as spectral degradation or reverberation. We suggest that this ability mediates territorial spacing and mate choice in A. femoralis. Good ranging abilities might also play a role in the remarkable orientation performance of this species, probably by enabling the establishment of a mental acoustic map of the habitat. Acoustic ranging allows the distance of vocalizing competitors and mates to be identified. While birds and mammals are known to use complex cues such as temporal degradation, frequency-dependent attenuation and reverberation for ranging, previous research indicated that frogs rely only on signal amplitude (sound pressure level) to assess the distance of other callers. The present study shows for the first time that also poison frogs can make use of more complex cues, an ability which is likely to be highly beneficial in their territorial social organization and probably can also be used for orientation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 16%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 46%
Environmental Science 5 9%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Psychology 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,443,340
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
#235
of 3,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,491
of 313,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
#7
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.