4.3 Article

Vocal duets in a nonpasserine: an examination of territory defence and neighbour-stranger discrimination in a neighbourhood of barred owls

期刊

BEHAVIOUR
卷 147, 期 5-6, 页码 619-639

出版社

BRILL
DOI: 10.1163/000579510X12632972452424

关键词

communication; vocal duet; neighbour-stranger discrimination; Strix varia

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation
  3. Government of Ontario
  4. University of Windsor
  5. American Ornithologists' Union
  6. Pelee Island Winery
  7. Nokuse Plantation Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mated pairs of animals in many taxa coordinate their vocalizations into duets, yet most research on duetting has focused on songbirds. Here we examine the duetting behaviour of barred owls (Strix varia) by addressing three questions: (1) Do owl duets play a role in territorial interactions? (2) Do owls discriminate between duets of neighbours versus strangers? (3) Do duets play a role in extended communication among a neighbourhood of owls? We simulated territorial encounters by broadcasting duets of adjacent, territory-holding owls (neighbours) and distant owls (strangers). We assessed responses to playback using a 3.5-km transect of automated recording devices. We compared vocal activity during a pre-playback period and following both playback treatments for the focal pair, their neighbours, and more distant owls within the neighbourhood. After playback, focal owls gave significantly more duets, vocalized for a longer duration, and emphasized different call types compared to the pre-playback period, demonstrating that barred owls use duets in territory defence. Focal owls did not respond significantly differently to neighbours versus strangers. At the neighbourhood level, owls did not behave differently during silent pre-playback periods or post-playback periods. Our results suggest barred owl duets function primarily in immediate confrontations during territorial conflicts.

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