Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T19:29:28.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - Avian Vocal Perception: Bioacoustics and Perceptual Mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2017

By
Neil McMillan ,
Marc T. Avey ,
Laurie L. Bloomfield ,
Lauren M. Guillette ,
Allison H. Hahn ,
Marisa Hoeschele  and
Christopher B. Sturdy
Edited by
Carel ten Cate  and
Susan D. Healy
Carel ten Cate
Affiliation:
Universiteit Leiden
Susan D. Healy
Affiliation:
University of St Andrews, Scotland
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Avian Cognition , pp. 270 - 295
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aust, U. and Huber, L. (2001). The role of item-and category-specific information in the discrimination of people versus non-people images by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 29, 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aust, U. and Huber, L. (2002). Target-defining features in a “people-present/people-absent” discrimination task by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 30, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aust, U. and Huber, L. (2003). Elemental versus configural perception in a people-present/people-absent discrimination task by pigeons. Animal Learning & Behavior, 31, 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avey, M. T., Bloomfield, L. L., Elie, J. E., et al. (2014). ZENK activation in the nidopallium of black-capped chickadees in response to both conspecific and heterospecific calls. PLoS One, 9, e100927.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Avey, M. T., Hoeschele, M., Moscicki, M. K., Bloomfield, L. L. and Sturdy, C. B. (2011). Neural correlates of threat perception: Neural equivalence of conspecific and heterospecific mobbing calls is learned. PLoSONE, 6, e23844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Avey, M. T., Kanyo, R. A., Irwin, E. L. and Sturdy, C. B. (2008). Differential effects of vocalization type, singer and listener on ZENK immediate early gene response in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). Behavioral Brain Research, 188, 201–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, P. H. (1982). The coding of species-specific characteristics in birds sounds. In Acoustic Communication in Birds, (Vol. 1), eds. Kroodsma, D. E. and Miller, E. H.. New York, NY; Academic Press, pp. 213–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beletsky, D. L. (1983a). An investigation of individual recognition by voice in female red-winged blackbirds. Animal Behaviour, 31, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beletsky, D. L. (1983b). Vocal mate recognition in male red-winged blackbirds, Agelaius phoeniceus. Behaviour, 84, 124–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berwick, R. C., Beckers, G. J. L., Okanoya, K. and Bolhuis, J. J. (2012). A bird's eye view of human language evolution. Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience, 4, 5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloomfield, L. L., Farrell, T. M. and Sturdy, C. B. (2008b). Categorization and discrimination of “chick-a-dee” calls by wild-caught and hand-reared chickadees. Behavioural Processes, 77, 166–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloomfield, L. L. and Sturdy, C. B. (2008). All “chick-a-dee” calls are not created equally. Part I: Open-ended categorization of chick-a-dee calls by sympatric and allopatric chickadees. Behavioural Processes, 77, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, L. L., Sturdy, C. B., Phillmore, L. S. and Weisman, R. G. (2003). Open-ended categorization of chick-a-dee calls by black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapilla). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 117, 290–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolhuis, J. J. and Gahr, M. (2006). Neural mechanisms of birdsong memory. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7, 347–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bregman, M. R., Patel, A. D. and Gentner, T. Q. (2012). Stimulus-dependent flexibility in non-human auditory pitch processing. Cognition, 122, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooks, R. J. and Falls, J. B. (1975). Individual recognition by song in white-throated sparrows. I. Discrimination of songs of neighbors and strangers. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 53, 879–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catchpole, C. K. and Slater, P. J. B. (2008). Bird song: Biological themes and variations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charrier, I., Lee, T. T.-Y., Bloomfield, L. L. and Sturdy, C. B. (2005). Acoustic mechanisms of note-type perception in black-capped chickadee calls. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 119, 371–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudhuri, A. (1997). Neural activity mapping with inducible transcription factors. Neuroreport, 8, 3–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chew, S. J., Mello, C., Nottebohm, F., Jarvis, E. and Vicario, D. S. (1995). Decrements in auditory responses to a repeated conspecific song are long-lasting and require two periods of protein synthesis in the songbird forebrain. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences USA, 92, 3406–3410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chew, S. J., Vicario, D. S. and Nottebohm, F. (1996). A large-capacity memory system that recognizes the calls and songs of individual birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences USA, 93, 1950–1955.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christie, P. J., Mennill, D. J. and Ratcliffe, L. M. (2004a). Chickadee song structure is individually distinctive over long broadcast distances. Behaviour, 141, 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christie, P. J., Mennill, D. J. and Ratcliffe, L. M. (2004b). Pitch shifts and song structure indicate male quality in the dawn chorus of black-capped chickadees. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 55, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cynx, J., Hulse, S.H. and Polyzois, S. (1986). A psychophysical measure of pitch discrimination loss resulting from a frequency range constraint in European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 12, 394–402.Google ScholarPubMed
Dawson, M. R. W., Bloomfield, L. L., Charrier, I. and Sturdy, C. B. (2006a). Statistical classification of black-capped (Poecile atricapillus) and mountain chickadee (P. gambeli) call notes. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 120, 147–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, M. R. W., Charrier, I. and Sturdy, C. B. (2006b). Using an artificial neural network to classify black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus) call note types. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119, 3161–3172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doupe, A. J. and Kuhl, P. K. (1999). Birdsong and human speech: common themes and mechanisms. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 22, 567–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eens, M. (1997). Understanding the complex song of the European starling: an integrated ethological approach. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 26, 355–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ficken, M. S., Ficken, R. W. and Witkin, S. R. (1978). Vocal repertoire of the black-capped chickadee. The Auk, 95, 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ficken, M. S., Hailman, E. D. and Hailman, J. P. (1994). The chick-a-dee call system of the Mexican chickadee. Condor, 96, 70–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forstmeier, W., Kempenaers, B., Meyer, A. and Leisler, B. (2002). A novel song parameter correlates with extra-pair paternity and reflects male longevity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 269, 1479–1485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeberg, T. M., Dunbar, R. I. and Ord, T. J. (2012). Social complexity as a proximate and ultimate factor in communicative complexity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367, 1785–1801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeberg, T. M. and Lucas, J. R. (2002). Receivers respond differently to chick-a-dee calls varying in note composition in Carolina chickadees, Poecile carolinensis. Animal Behaviour, 63, 837–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, A., Zentall, T. and Weisman, R. (2007). Absolute pitch: frequency-range discriminations in pigeons (Columba livia): Comparisons with zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghosh, A., Ginty, D. D., Bading, H. and Greenberg, M. E. (1994). Calcium regulation of gene expression in neuronal cells. Journal of Neurobiology, 25, 294–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guillette, L. M., Bloomfield, L. L., Batty, E. R., Dawson, M. R. W. and Sturdy, C. B. (2010a). Black-capped (Poecile atricapillus) and mountain chickadee (Poecile gambeli) contact call contains species, sex, and individual identity features. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 1116–1123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guillette, L. M., Farrell, T. M., Hoeschele, M., et al. (2010b). Mechanisms of call note type perception: Peak shift in a note type continuum. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 124, 109–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillette, L. M., Farrell, T. M., Hoeschele, M. and Sturdy, C. B. (2010c). Acoustic mechanisms of a species-based discrimination of the chick-a-dee call in sympatric black-capped (Poecile atricapillus) and mountain chickadees (P. gambeli). Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guillette, L. M. Hahn, A. H., Hoeschele, M., Przyslupski, A-M. and Sturdy, C. B. (2015) Individual differences in learning speed, performance accuracy and exploratory behaviour in black-capped chickadees. Animal Cognition, 18, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guillette, L. M., Reddon, A. R., Hoeschele, M. and Sturdy, C. B. (2011). Sometimes slower is better: slow-exploring birds are more sensitive to changes in a vocal discrimination task. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278, 767–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillette, L. M., Reddon, A. R., Hurd, P. L. and Sturdy, C. B. (2009) Exploration of novel space is associated with individual differences in learning speed in black-capped chickadees, Poecile atricapillus. Behavioural Processes, 82, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A. H., Guillette, L. M., Hoeschele, M., et al. (2013a). Dominance and geographic information contained within black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus) song. Behaviour, 150, 1601–1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, A. H., Guillette, L. M., Lee, D., et al. (2015a). Experience affects immediate early gene expression in response to conspecific call notes in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). Behavioural Brain Research, 287, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hahn, A. H., Hoang, J., McMillan, N., et al. (2015b). Biological salience influences performance and acoustic mechanisms for the discrimination of male and female songs. Animal Behaviour, 104, 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, A. H., Krysler, A., Sturdy, C. B., (2013b). Female song in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus): Acoustic song features that contain individual identity information and sex differences. Behavioural Processes, 98, 98–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hailman, J. P. (1989). The organization of major vocalizations in the Paridae. The Wilson Bulletin, 101, 305–343.Google Scholar
Hailman, J. P., Ficken, M. S. and Ficken, R. W. (1987). Constraints on the structure of combinatorial ‘chick-a-dee’ calls. Ethology, 75, 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrnstein, R. J. (1990). Levels of stimulus control: A functional approach. Cognition, 37, 133–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herrnstein, R. J. and Loveland, D. H. (1964). Complex visual concept in the pigeon. Science, 146, 549–551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoeschele, M., Gammon, D. E., Moscicki, M. K. and Sturdy, C. B. (2009). Note types and coding in Parid vocalizations: the chick-a-dee call of the chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufuscens). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 126(4), 2088–2099.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoeschele, M., Guillette, L. M. and Sturdy, C. B. (2012a). Biological relevance of acoustic signal affects discrimination performance in a songbird. Animal Cognition, 15, 677–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoeschele, M., Moscicki, M. K., Otter, K. A., et al. (2010). Dominance signalled in an acoustic ornament. Animal Behaviour, 78, 657–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoeschele, M., Weisman, R. G., Guillette, L. M., Hahn, A. H. and Sturdy, C. B. (2013). Chickadees fail standardized operant tests for octave equivalence. Animal Cognition, 16, 599–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoeschele, M., Weisman, R. G. and Sturdy, C. B. (2012b). Pitch chroma discrimination, generalization, and transfer tests of octave equivalence in humans. Attention, Perception and Psychophysics, 74(8), 1742–1760.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horn, A. G., Leonard, M. L., Ratcliffe, L., Shackleton, S. A. and Weisman, R. G. (1992). Frequency variation in songs of black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus). The Auk, 109, 847–852.Google Scholar
Hughes, M., Nowicki, S. and Lohr, B. (1998). Call learning in black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus): The role of experience in the development of “chick-a-dee” calls. Ethology, 104, 232–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurly, T. A., Ratcliffe, L. and Weisman, R. (1990). Relative pitch recognition in white-throated sparrows, Zonotrichia albicollis. Animal Behaviour, 40, 176–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janik, V. M. and Slater, P. J. B. (1997). Vocal learning in mammals. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 26, 59–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, E. D. (2004). Learned birdsong and the neurobiology of human language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1016, 749–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knapska, E. and Kaczmarek, L. (2004). A gene for neuronal plasticity in the mammalian brain: Zif268/Egr-1/NGFI-A/Krox-24/TIS8/ZENK? Progress in Neurobiology, 74, 183–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krams, I., Krama, T., Freeberg, T. M., Kullberg, C. and Lucas, J. R. (2012). Linking social complexity and vocal complexity: a parid perspective. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367, 1879–1891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langmore, N. E., (1998). Functions of duet and solo songs of female birds. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 13, 136–140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leavesley, A. J. and Magrath, R. D. (2005). Communicating about danger: Urgency alarm calling in a bird. Animal Behaviour, 70, 365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, R. N. (1996a). Song behaviour and reproductive strategies in a duetting wren, Thryothorus nigricapillus: I. Removal experiments. Animal Behaviour, 52, 1093–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, R. N. (1996b). Song behaviour and reproductive strategies in a duetting wren, Thryothorus nigricapillus: II. Playback experiments. Animal Behaviour, 52, 1107–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lind, H., Dabelsteen, T. and McGregor, P. K. (1996). Female great tits can identify mates by song. Animal Behaviour, 52, 667–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacDougall-Shackleton, S. A., Hulse, S. H. and Ball, G. F. (1998). Neural bases of song preferences in female zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). Neuroreport, 9, 3047–3052.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mahurin, E. J. and Freeberg, T. M. (2009). Chick-a-dee call variation in Carolina chickadees and recruiting flockmates to food. Behavioral Ecology, 20, 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marler, P. (2004). Bird calls: A cornucopia for communication. In Nature's Music: The Science of Birdsong, eds. Marler, P. and Slabbekoorn, H.. San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press, pp. 132–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matragrano, L. L., Beaulieu, M., Phillip, J. O., et al. (2012). Rapid effects of hearing song on catecholaminergic activity in the songbird auditory pathway. PloS One, 7(6), e39388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDermott, J. and Hauser, M. (2005). The origins of music: Innateness, uniqueness, and evolution. Music Perception, 23(1), 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McElroy, D. B. and Ritchison, G. (1996). Effect of mate removal on singing behavior and movement patterns of female northern cardinals. The Wilson Bulletin, 108, 550–555.Google Scholar
Mello, C., Vicario, D. and Clayton, D. F. (1992). Song presentation induces gene expression in the songbird forebrain. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences USA, 89, 6818–6822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mello, C. V., Velho, T. A. and Pinaud, R. (2004). Song-induced gene expression: A window on song auditory processing and perception. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1016, 263–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milbrandt, J. (1987). A nerve growth factor-induced gene encodes a possible transcriptional regulatory factor. Science, 238, 797–799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mooney, R. (2009a). Neurobiology of song learning. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 19, 654–660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mooney, R. (2009b). Neural mechanisms for learned birdsong. Learning & Memory, 16, 655–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nickerson, C. M., Bloomfield, L. L., Dawson, M. R. W. and Sturdy, C. B. (2006). Artificial neural network discrimination of black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus) call notes. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 1111–1117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Njegovan, M. and Weisman, R. G. (1997). Pitch discrimination in field- and isolation-reared black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 111, 294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nottebohm, F. (1972). The origins of vocal learning. The American Naturalist, 106, 116–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nottebohm, F. (2005). The neural basis of birdsong. PLoS Biology, 3, e164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odom, K. J., Hall, M. L., Riebel, K., Omland, K. E. and Langmore, N. E. (2014). Female song is widespread and ancestral in songbirds. Nature Communications, 5, 3379. DOI:10.1038/ncomms4379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, S. C., Hulse, S. H. and Cynx, J. (1989). Relative pitch perception in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris): further evidence for an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 15, 137–146.Google ScholarPubMed
Phillmore, L. S., Bloomfield, L. L. and Weisman, R. G. (2003a). Effects of songs and calls on ZENK expression in the auditory telencephalon of field- and isolate-reared black capped chickadees. Behavioural Brain Research, 147, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillmore, L. S., Sturdy, C. B., Turyk, M. M. and Weisman, R. G. (2002). Discrimination of individual vocalizations by black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapilla). Animal Learning and Behavior, 30, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillmore, L. S., Sturdy, C. B. and Weisman, R. G. (2003b). Does reduced social contact affect discrimination of distance cues and individual vocalizations? Animal Behaviour, 65, 911–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinaud, R. and Terleph, T. A. (2008). A songbird forebrain area potentially involved in auditory discrimination and memory formation. Journal of Biosciences, 33, 145–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ratcliffe, L. and Weisman, R. G. (1985). Frequency shift in the fee bee song of the black-capped chickadee. The Condor, 87, 555–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiner, A., Perkel, D. J., Mello, C. V. and Jarvis, E. D. (2004). Songbirds and the revised avian brain nomenclature. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1016, 77–108.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riebel, K. (2003). The “mute” sex revisited: vocal production and perception learning in female songbirds. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 33, 49–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchison, G. (1988). Song repertoires and the singing behavior of male northern cardinals. The Wilson Bulletin, 100, 583–603.Google Scholar
Searcy, W. A., Nowicki, S., Hughes, M. and Peters, S. (2002). Geographic song discrimination in relation to dispersal distances in song sparrows. The American Naturalist, 159, 221–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searcy, W. A., Nowicki, S. and Peters, S. (2003). Phonology and geographic song discrimination in song sparrows. Ethology, 109, 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seyfarth, R. M., Cheney, D. L. and Marler, P. (1980). Monkey responses to three difference alarm calls: evidence of predator classification and semantic communication. Science, 210, 801–803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shackleton, S. A. and Ratcliffe, L. M. (1993). Development of song in hand-reared black-capped chickadees. Wilson Bulletin, 105, 637–644.Google Scholar
Shackleton, S. A., Ratcliffe, L. and Weary, D. M. (1992). Relative frequency parameters and song recognition in black-capped chickadees. The Condor, 94, 782–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheng, M. and Greenberg, M. E. (1990). The regulation and function of c-fos and other immediate early genes in the nervous system. Neuron, 4, 477–485.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slater, P. J. B. and Mann, N. I. (2004). Why do the females of many bird species sing in the tropics? Journal of Avian Biology, 35, 289–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soard, C. M. and Ritchison, G. (2009). ‘Chick-a-dee'calls of Carolina chickadees convey information about degree of threat posed by avian predators. Animal Behaviour, 78(6), 1447–1453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturdy, C. B., Phillmore, L. S. and Weisman, R. G. (2000). Call-note discriminations in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 114, 357–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Templeton, C. N., Greene, E. and Davis, K. (2005). Allometry of alarm calls: Black-capped chickadees encode information about predator size. Science, 308, 1934–1937.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ten Cate, C. and Okanoya, K. (2012). Revisiting the syntactic abilities of non-human animals: natural vocalizations and artificial grammar learning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 367(1598), 1984–1994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Terleph, T. A. and Pinaud, R. (2010). Neural coding of temporal information and its topography in the auditory cortex. Journal of Biosciences, 35, 499–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Touchton, J. M., Seddon, N. and Tobias, J. A. (2014). Captive rearing experiments confirm song development without learning in a tracheophone suboscine bird. PLoS ONE, 9, e95746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vates, G. E., Broome, B. M., Mello, C. V. and Nottebohm, F. (1996). Auditory pathways of caudal telencephalon and their relation to the song system of adult male zebra finches (Taenopygia guttata). Journal of Comparative Neurology, 366, 613–642.3.0.CO;2-7>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, S., Lea, S. E. and Dittrich, W. H. (1993). What can we learn from experiments on pigeon concept discrimination? In Vision, Brain, and Behavior in Birds, eds. Ziegler, H. P. and Bischof, H.-J.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 351–376.Google Scholar
Weary, D. M. and Weisman, R. G. (1991). Operant discrimination of frequency and frequency ratio in the black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 105, 253–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, D. M., Weisman, R. G., Lemon, R. E., Chin, T. and Mongrain, J. (1991). Use of relative frequency of notes by veeries in song recognition and production. The Auk, 108, 977–981.Google Scholar
Weisman, R. G., Njegovan, M., Sturdy, C. B., et al. (1998). Frequency-range discriminations: special and general abilities in zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112, 244–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weisman, R. G., Njegovan, M. G., Williams, M. T., Cohen, J. S. and Sturdy, C. B. (2004). A behavior analysis of absolute pitch: sex, experience, and species. Behavioural Processes, 66, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weisman, R. G. and Ratcliffe, L. (1989). Absolute and relative pitch processing in black-capped chickadees, Parus atricapillus. Animal Behaviour, 38, 685–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisman, R. G. and Ratcliffe, L. (2004). Relative pitch and the song of black-capped chickadees. American Scientist, 92, 532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisman, R. G., Ratcliffe, L., Johnsrude, I. and Hurly, T. A. (1990). Absolute and relative pitch production in the song of the black-capped chickadee. The Condor, 92, 118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D. R. and Mennill, D. J. (2010). Black-capped chickadees, Poecile atricapillus, can use individually distinctive songs to discriminate among conspecifics. Animal Behaviour, 79, 1267–1275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×