Back

Young Eurasian Scops Owls make individually distinctive vocalizations

Grieco, F.

2023-09-17 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/2023.09.17.558098 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Vocal distinctiveness is expected to occur more often in colonial-breeding species as the parents need to recognize their offspring in a large group of conspecifics. Territorial species like the Scops Owl are expected to exhibit low distinctiveness. Contrary to what was expected, spectrographic analysis of the food-begging calls of young Scops Owls revealed previously unknown, complex acoustic structure. Within recording sessions, call duration exhibited the highest repeatability (average R 0.82), followed by the peak frequency in the last third of the call (0.61). Other spectral measures showed low to moderate repeatability (0.32 - 0.57), while the time between subsequent calls was the least repeatable (0.15). When comparing recordings made on different nights, Linear Discriminant Analysis assigned 55.7% of the calls to the correct individual, and 73.1% when restricting analysis within broods. When analyzing variability across recordings, individuals explained most of the variation in Call duration and Peak frequency in the last third of the call (89.5 % and 81.2 %, respectively), while recordings explained little variation (3.4 % and 1.3 %, respectively), suggesting that those acoustic features were the most important in vocal stability and distinctiveness. The calculated information capacity HS was 4.48 bits, i.e. within the range of values found in loosely-colonial species. The results suggest that the vocalizations of young Scops Owls show moderate individuality that could only help offspring recognition among a small number of individuals. However, the functional significance of call distinctiveness remains unclear; a few hypotheses are discussed. Keywords: Acoustic signature, coloniality, fledglings, individuality, Otus scops, repeatability.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.6%
2
Behavioural Processes
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.3%
3
Journal of Experimental Biology
249 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
8.6%
4
Animal Behaviour
65 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
5
Ibis
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 23%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
7
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.4%
8
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
9
Ethology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.0%
10
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.6%
11
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.1%
12
Behavioural Brain Research
70 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
13
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
14
Ecological Informatics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
15
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
33 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.4%
16
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
17
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
18
Animal Cognition
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
19
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
20
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 31%
0.8%
21
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Hearing Research
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
23
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
24
Evolutionary Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.7%
25
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
26
Open Research Europe
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
27
Animals
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
28
Behavioral Ecology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
29
Biology Letters
66 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
30
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.5%