Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Sexual differences in species recognition of avian song

Abstract

Studies of species recognition in male birds have often identified features that are distinctive, invariant markers of a species song but which can be altered without altering male response1–4. Such results raise the question of why natural selection has favoured the retention of these features in the song. We propose that such features are favoured by selection because females use them in species recognition even though males do not. There are excellent theoretical grounds for expecting that males and females of the same species would differ in their means of species recognition, as required by this hypothesis. We report here that female red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) discriminate against abnormal songs previously shown to be acceptable to males of this species. Similar sexual differences in species recognition may be expected in animals other than birds, and in recognition systems based on cues other than vocalizations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Falls, J. B. Proc. XIII Int. ornith. Congr. 259–271 (1963).

  2. Emlen, S. Behaviour 41, 130–171 (1972).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boughey, M. J. & Thompson, N. S. Behaviour 57, 64–90 (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Peters, S. S., Searcy, W. A. & Marler, P. Anim. Behav. 28, 393–404 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. King, A. P. & West, M. J. Science 195, 1002–1004 (1977).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Searcy, W. A. & Marler, P. Science 213, 926–928 (1981).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Searcy, W. A., Marler, P. & Peters, S. S. Anim. Behav. 29, 997–1003 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Catchpole, C. K., Dittami, J. & Leisler, B. Nature 312, 563–564 (1984).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  9. Williams, G. C. Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of some Current Evolutionary Thought (Princeton University Press, 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Trivers, R. L. in Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man (ed. Campbell, B. G.) 136–179 (Aldine, Chicago, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Beletsky, L. D., Chao, S. & Smith, D. G. Behaviour 73, 189–203 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brenowitz, E. A. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 10, 29–38 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Brenowitz, E. A. Auk 99, 584–586 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brenowitz, E. A. Anim. Behav. 31, 1116–1127 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Williams, H. B. Behav. neural Biol. 44, 470–484 (1985).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Searcy, W., Brenowitz, E. Sexual differences in species recognition of avian song. Nature 332, 152–154 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1038/332152a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/332152a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing