4.3 Article

Contact Calls of Common Marmosets (Callithrix jacchus): Influence of Age of Caller on Antiphonal Calling and Other Vocal Responses

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
卷 71, 期 2, 页码 165-170

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ajp.20636

关键词

common marmoset; vocal dialogue; age; phee calls; twitter calls

类别

资金

  1. Australia Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marmosets, as do many other primates, live in forest environments, are group living and constantly at risk of predation. Retaining contact with one another is therefore a matter of survival. We ask here whether their contact calls (phee and twitter vocalizations) are in some way ordered acoustically by sex or age and whether the calls of older marmosets elicit different responses than those of younger marmosets. In our study, marmosets (12-14 years) were visually isolated from conspecifics and the vocal responses to each isolated caller by other marmosets in the colony were recorded. Vocal responses to phee calls largely consisted of phee calls and, less commonly, twitter calls. No differences between the responses to calls by males and females were apparent. However, we found a strong positive and significant correlation between the caller's age and the percentage of its phee calls receiving a phee response, and a significant negative correlation between the caller's age and the percentage of its phee calls receiving a twitter response. The older the marmoset, the more antiphonal calling occurred. Two-syllable phee calls were emitted more often by older marmosets (10-14 years) than by younger ones (2-6 years). Hence, we have found age-dependent differences in phee-call production and a consistent change in the response received across the adult life-span. This age-dependent effect was independent of kinship relations. This is the first evidence that marmosets distinguish age by vocal parameters alone and make social decisions based on age. Am. J. Primatol. 71:165-170, 2009. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据