Stream noise, hybridization, and uncoupled evolution of call traits in two lineages of poison frogs: Oophaga histrionica and Oophaga lehmanni.
According to the acoustic adaptation hypothesis, communication signals are evolutionary shaped in a way that minimizes its degradation and maximizes its contrast against the background noise. To compare the importance for call divergence of acoustic adaptation and hybridization, an evolutionary forc...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2013
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/25f3ca0c66cc486b88797c723f43330f |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | According to the acoustic adaptation hypothesis, communication signals are evolutionary shaped in a way that minimizes its degradation and maximizes its contrast against the background noise. To compare the importance for call divergence of acoustic adaptation and hybridization, an evolutionary force allegedly promoting phenotypic variation, we compared the mate recognition signal of two species of poison frogs (Oophaga histrionica and O. lehmanni) at five localities: two (one per species) alongside noisy streams, two away from streams, and one interspecific hybrid. We recorded the calls of 47 males and characterized the microgeographic variation in their spectral and temporal features, measuring ambient noise level, body size, and body temperature as covariates. As predicted, frogs living in noisy habitats uttered high frequency calls and, in one species, were much smaller in size. These results support a previously unconsidered role of noise on streams as a selective force promoting an increase in call frequency and pleiotropic effects in body size. Regarding hybrid frogs, their calls overlapped in the signal space with the calls of one of the parental lineages. Our data support acoustic adaptation following two evolutionary routes but do not support the presumed role of hybridization in promoting phenotypic diversity. |
|---|