↓ Skip to main content

The Syntax and Meaning of Wild Gibbon Songs

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
9 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
174 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
286 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Syntax and Meaning of Wild Gibbon Songs
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2006
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0000073
Pubmed ID
Authors

Esther Clarke, Ulrich H. Reichard, Klaus Zuberbühler

Abstract

Spoken language is a result of the human capacity to assemble simple vocal units into more complex utterances, the basic carriers of semantic information. Not much is known about the evolutionary origins of this behaviour. The vocal abilities of non-human primates are relatively unimpressive in comparison, with gibbon songs being a rare exception. These apes assemble a repertoire of call notes into elaborate songs, which function to repel conspecific intruders, advertise pair bonds, and attract mates. We conducted a series of field experiments with white-handed gibbons at Khao Yai National Park, Thailand, which showed that this ape species uses songs also to protect themselves against predation. We compared the acoustic structure of predatory-induced songs with regular songs that were given as part of their daily routine. Predator-induced songs were identical to normal songs in the call note repertoire, but we found consistent differences in how the notes were assembled into songs. The responses of out-of-sight receivers demonstrated that these syntactic differences were meaningful to conspecifics. Our study provides the first evidence of referential signalling in a free-ranging ape species, based on a communication system that utilises combinatorial rules.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 2%
United States 3 1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 269 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 21%
Student > Master 57 20%
Researcher 47 16%
Student > Bachelor 27 9%
Professor 19 7%
Other 50 17%
Unknown 26 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 140 49%
Psychology 39 14%
Environmental Science 17 6%
Social Sciences 16 6%
Linguistics 8 3%
Other 30 10%
Unknown 36 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 26 February 2023.
All research outputs
#702,660
of 24,330,613 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#9,575
of 209,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,598
of 162,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#9
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,330,613 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 209,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 162,951 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.