These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24990679)

  • 21. Lack of phonotactic preferences of female frogs and its consequences for signal evolution.
    Velásquez NA; Valdés JL; Vásquez RA; Penna M
    Behav Processes; 2015 Sep; 118():76-84. PubMed ID: 26051194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Do frog-eating bats perceptually bind the complex components of frog calls?
    Jones PL; Farris HE; Ryan MJ; Page RA
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2013 Apr; 199(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 23322446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. History influences signal recognition: neural network models of túngara frogs.
    Phelps SM; Ryan MJ
    Proc Biol Sci; 2000 Aug; 267(1453):1633-9. PubMed ID: 11467426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The mechanism of sound production in túngara frogs and its role in sexual selection and speciation.
    Ryan MJ; Guerra MA
    Curr Opin Neurobiol; 2014 Oct; 28():54-9. PubMed ID: 25033110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Multimodal signal variation in space and time: how important is matching a signal with its signaler?
    Taylor RC; Klein BA; Stein J; Ryan MJ
    J Exp Biol; 2011 Mar; 214(Pt 5):815-20. PubMed ID: 21307068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sexual hearing: the influence of sex hormones on acoustic communication in frogs.
    Arch VS; Narins PM
    Hear Res; 2009 Jun; 252(1-2):15-20. PubMed ID: 19272318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Arginine vasotocin affects vocal behavior but not selective responses to conspecific calls in male túngara frogs.
    Kime NM; Goutte S; Ryan MJ
    Horm Behav; 2021 Feb; 128():104891. PubMed ID: 33197465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Perception of complex sounds by the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea: envelope and fine-structure cues.
    Simmons AM; Buxbaum RC; Mirin MP
    J Comp Physiol A; 1993 Sep; 173(3):321-7. PubMed ID: 8229896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Individual differences reveal the basis of consonance.
    McDermott JH; Lehr AJ; Oxenham AJ
    Curr Biol; 2010 Jun; 20(11):1035-41. PubMed ID: 20493704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Functional mapping of the auditory midbrain during mate call reception.
    Hoke KL; Burmeister SS; Fernald RD; Rand AS; Ryan MJ; Wilczynski W
    J Neurosci; 2004 Dec; 24(50):11264-72. PubMed ID: 15601932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Schema vs. primitive perceptual grouping: the relative weighting of sequential vs. spatial cues during an auditory grouping task in frogs.
    Farris HE; Ryan MJ
    J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2017 Mar; 203(3):175-182. PubMed ID: 28197725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Is consonance attractive to budgerigars? No evidence from a place preference study.
    Wagner B; Bowling DL; Hoeschele M
    Anim Cogn; 2020 Sep; 23(5):973-987. PubMed ID: 32572655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Frequency channel-dependent selectivity for temporal call characteristics in gray treefrogs,
    Reichert MS; Höbel G
    J Exp Biol; 2017 Apr; 220(Pt 7):1256-1266. PubMed ID: 28104800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Glucocorticoid-Mediated Changes in Male Green Treefrog Vocalizations Alter Attractiveness to Females.
    Leary CJ; Crocker-Buta S; Holloway A; Kennedy JGC
    Integr Comp Biol; 2021 Jul; 61(1):283-291. PubMed ID: 33940612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A biological rationale for musical consonance.
    Bowling DL; Purves D
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Sep; 112(36):11155-60. PubMed ID: 26209651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus.
    Ryan MJ; Fox JH; Wilczynski W; Rand AS
    Nature; 1990 Jan; 343(6253):66-7. PubMed ID: 2296291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Neurobiology of Female Mate Choice in Frogs: Auditory Filtering and Valuation.
    Burmeister SS
    Integr Comp Biol; 2017 Oct; 57(4):857-864. PubMed ID: 29048536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Sharply tuned cochlear nerve ensemble periodicity responses to sonic and ultrasonic frequencies.
    Henry KR
    J Comp Physiol A; 1997 Sep; 181(3):239-46. PubMed ID: 9309867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Synchronized mating signals in a communication network: the challenge of avoiding predators while attracting mates.
    Legett HD; Page RA; Bernal XE
    Proc Biol Sci; 2019 Oct; 286(1912):20191067. PubMed ID: 31594513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.