160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15376690)
1. Amplification and spectral shifts of vocalizations inside burrows of the frog Eupsophus calcaratus (Leptodactylidae).
Penna M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Aug; 116(2):1254-60. PubMed ID: 15376690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Extended amplification of acoustic signals by amphibian burrows.
Muñoz MI; Penna M
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2016 Jul; 202(7):473-87. PubMed ID: 27209276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Severe constraints for sound communication in a frog from the South American temperate forest.
Penna M; Plaza A; Moreno-Gómez FN
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2013 Aug; 199(8):723-33. PubMed ID: 23748250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Ample active acoustic space of a frog from the South American temperate forest.
Penna M; Moreno-Gómez FN
J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2014 Mar; 200(3):171-81. PubMed ID: 24356786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Vocal responses of austral forest frogs to amplitude and degradation patterns of advertisement calls.
Penna M; Moreno-Gómez FN; Muñoz MI; Cisternas J
Behav Processes; 2017 Jul; 140():190-201. PubMed ID: 28512036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Contrasting Propagation of Natural Calls of Two Anuran Species from the South American Temperate Forest.
Penna M; Moreno-Gómez FN
PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0134498. PubMed ID: 26230852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Nonoptimal propagation of advertisement calls of midwife toads in Iberian habitats.
Penna M; Márquez R; Bosch J; Crespo EG
J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Feb; 119(2):1227-37. PubMed ID: 16521783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Propagation of natural toad calls in a Mediterranean terrestrial environment.
Penna M; Llusia D; Márquez R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):4025-31. PubMed ID: 23231131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The use of bioacoustics in anuran taxonomy: theory, terminology, methods and recommendations for best practice.
Köhler J; Jansen M; Rodríguez A; Kok PJR; Toledo LF; Emmrich M; Glaw F; Haddad CFB; Rödel MO; Vences M
Zootaxa; 2017 Apr; 4251(1):1-124. PubMed ID: 28609991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Call transmission efficiency in native and invasive anurans: competing hypotheses of divergence in acoustic signals.
Llusia D; Gómez M; Penna M; Márquez R
PLoS One; 2013; 8(10):e77312. PubMed ID: 24155940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Review of bioacoustical traits in the genus Physalaemus Fitzinger, 1826 (Anura: Leptodactylidae: Leiuperinae).
Hepp F; Pombal JPJ
Zootaxa; 2020 Jan; 4725(1):zootaxa.4725.1.1. PubMed ID: 32230594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Sound Classification and Call Discrimination Are Decoded in Order as Revealed by Event-Related Potential Components in Frogs.
Fang G; Yang P; Xue F; Cui J; Brauth SE; Tang Y
Brain Behav Evol; 2015; 86(3-4):232-45. PubMed ID: 26613526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How the environment shapes animal signals: a test of the acoustic adaptation hypothesis in frogs.
Goutte S; Dubois A; Howard SD; Márquez R; Rowley JJL; Dehling JM; Grandcolas P; Xiong RC; Legendre F
J Evol Biol; 2018 Jan; 31(1):148-158. PubMed ID: 29150984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Vocalizations of female frogs contain nonlinear characteristics and individual signatures.
Zhang F; Zhao J; Feng AS
PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0174815. PubMed ID: 28358859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Biotic and abiotic sounds affect calling activity but not plasma testosterone levels in male frogs (Batrachyla taeniata) in the field and in captivity.
Muñoz MI; Quispe M; Maliqueo M; Penna M
Horm Behav; 2020 Feb; 118():104605. PubMed ID: 31644890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Bioacoustic of the advertisement call of Ceratophrys cranwelli (Anura: Ceratophryidae)].
Valetti JA; Salas NE; Martino AL
Rev Biol Trop; 2013 Mar; 61(1):273-80. PubMed ID: 23894980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Floating frogs sound larger: environmental constraints on signal production drives call frequency changes.
Goutte S; Muñoz MI; Ryan MJ; Halfwerk W
Naturwissenschaften; 2020 Sep; 107(5):41. PubMed ID: 32970183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mating vocalizations of female frogs: control and evolutionary mechanisms.
Emerson SB; Boyd SK
Brain Behav Evol; 1999; 53(4):187-97. PubMed ID: 10343085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Advertisement-call preferences in diploid-tetraploid treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis and Hyla versicolor): implications for mate choice and the evolution of communication systems.
Gerhardt HC
Evolution; 2005 Feb; 59(2):395-408. PubMed ID: 15807424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evidence of auditory insensitivity to vocalization frequencies in two frogs.
Goutte S; Mason MJ; Christensen-Dalsgaard J; Montealegre-Z F; Chivers BD; Sarria-S FA; Antoniazzi MM; Jared C; Almeida Sato L; Felipe Toledo L
Sci Rep; 2017 Sep; 7(1):12121. PubMed ID: 28935936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
